Longmore House Salisbury Place Edinburgh Planning Officer EH9 1SH North Council Cunninghame House Enquiry Line: 0131-668-8716 IRVINE [email protected] KA12 8EE Our ref: LDP/NAYR Our Case ID: 201603731 02 November 2016 Dear

Planning etc. () Act 2006 – Local Development Plan 2 - Call for Sites Consultation

Thank you for consulting Historic Environment Scotland on those sites under consideration for inclusion within the North Ayrshire Council Local Development Plan 2.

These sites have been identified following a ‘Call for Sites’ exercise undertaken in preparation of the new LDP. In reviewing these sites, we have indicated below where we consider that impacts on our historic environment interests are likely to be the most significant. We have focused our comments toward those sites where we have a role in the consequential planning decisions falling from the plan, should they be taken forward as preferred sites. Our remit covers scheduled monuments and their settings, category A-listed buildings and their setting, Inventory gardens and designed landscapes, Inventory battlefields and world heritage sites.

Our detailed comments in relation to each site with the potential to impact on our historic environment interests are provided in the attached annex. Please be advised that development of the following sites in their current form is likely to have an impact on our historic environment interests such that we would not support the inclusion of these within the emerging Local Development Plan 2.

• CFS66 – Main Road, Fairlie • CFS67 – Shore Lodge and Walled Garden

We also note that a number of sites submitted as part of this consultation (CFS56, CFS57, CFS58) propose development in the vicinity of the Category A listed Law Castle (LB14279). Law Castle was built c. 1468 for Princess Mary, sister of James III, and stands as an oblong castle on high ground overlooking the surrounding towns and villages. While there is scope for development on these sites, we consider that this should be sensitively designed to protect and retain the castle’s setting. This is likely to involve positioning development on the lower ground away from the Castle. We would welcome involvement in the preparation of any site development briefs/developer requirements for these potential allocations.

I hope that the information provided here is helpful to you. We would also recommend seeking further advice in relation to the potential allocations from your Council’s

Historic Environment Scotland – Longmore House, Salisbury Place, Edinburgh, EH9 1SH Scottish Charity No. SC045925 VAT No. GB 221 8680 15

archaeology and conservation advisory service. They will also be able to advise on historic environment issues including likely impacts on unscheduled archaeology, conservation areas, and on B and C listed buildings.

Should you wish to discuss any issue raised in this response please do not hesitate to contact me on

Yours sincerely,

Annex: Site Specific Comments

CFS07 – Old Toll House

This site is located in the vicinity of the scheduled monument known as Mount, mound (Index no. 3422). This comprises an artificial mound of earth and stones. While its original function is unclear, the monument’s position affords good outward views in all directions, as well as making the monument a visible feature in the landscape. These views are important elements in the setting of the monument and should be considered as part of any forthcoming proposals in this area. We do not consider, however, that development on this site would significantly impact on views from and towards the monument.

CFS14 – Kerelaw

This large site is located in the vicinity of the scheduled monument known as Kerelaw Castle (Index no. 7864). This comprises the remains of a 16th century castle on the site of an earlier dwelling, which was modified in the 19th century to form a folly. The monument is presently situated beside a modern housing development to the east and a belt of mature trees to the west.

The site is located just to the west of the mature trees, and we consider that development of this nature in this location has the potential to impact on the setting of the castle. However, this could be mitigated through the provision of a buffer around the castle and Kerelaw Glen which would serve to retain open space in its immediate vicinity. This may involve amending the boundaries of the potential development area and the provision of detailed developer requirements.

CFS36 – Rockfield & CFS47 – Greenfield,

Two scheduled monuments are located in the vicinity of these housing sites: Doon, fort and standing stones (Index no. 4415), an Iron Age hillfort and a late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age standing stone situated on a commanding position on Drumadoon Point, and Torr Righ Mor, hut circles and cultivation remains S of (Index no. 4414) which comprises one of the best surviving Bronze Age settlement sites on Arran.

The sites are located between 560 to 800m to the south-east of the monuments. However, given their location among existing housing development and the distance to the monuments, we do not consider that development in either location would significantly impact on the setting of the monuments.

CFS41 – Merkland Bridge Site

This site is located within the Castle Inventory Designed Landscape (GDL71). While we are content with the principle of development at this existing traveller site, we would recommend that any forthcoming development should take into account the site’s location within the Brodick Castle GDL in its design and landscaping. This should involve retaining the existing trees along the edge of the development site and coast road, and reinforcing these with new planting.

CFS54 – Land at Ardmhor

This site is located in the vicinity of the scheduled monument known as Giants’ Graves, long cairns, , Arran (Index no.398). These comprise of two chambered Neolithic Clyde type long cairns which are situated 130m AOD. The monument’s position affords good outward views - especially eastwards to the coast, as well as making the monument a visible feature in the landscape. These views are important elements in the setting of the monument. Forestry plantation in the vicinity of the monument has now been cleared, meaning that views have been opened up.

This large housing site is located 450m to the east of the monument. However, as this is on much lower lying ground, we do not consider that development in this location would significantly impact on views from and towards the monument.

CFS56 – Site to the North of the Orchards, Law Brae,

This site is located in the vicinity of the Category A listed Law Castle (LB14279). While we do not consider that the development of 35 housing units in this location would have a significant impact on the setting of the Castle, we would advise that this development should not be more than two-three storeys in height.

CFS57 – Site to the South of Lawoodhead, Springside, West Kilbride

This site is located in the vicinity of the Category A listed Law Castle (LB14279). While we consider that a development of five houses, flood amelioration and Equestrian/commercial development could be accommodated in this location, we would advise that this is positioned at the north east corner of the site on lower ground where it would be less detrimental to the setting of the Castle.

CFS58 – Former Farmfield Site, North of High Road, West Kilbride

This site is located in the vicinity of the Category A listed Law Castle (LB14279). While we consider that there is some scope for development in this location, we have concerns about the 280 residential units as proposed for this site. We would advise that any development in this location should be located in the lower south west part of the site, and not be more than two-three storeys in height. We would not support any development in the north part of the site, abutting Law Castle, as this would have a detrimental impact on the setting of the Category A listed building.

CFS59 – Tournament Park, Road, Irvine

This site is located in the vicinity of Inventory Designed Landscape (GDL170). While we are content with the principle of development in this location, we would advise that any developer requirements for this site should take into account its proximity to the Eglinton Castle GDL.

CFS63 – Fairlie

This site is located in the vicinity of the scheduled monument known as Southannan Mansionhouse, Fairlie (Index no. 333). It comprises the remains of the previously extensive castle which had a high enclosing courtyard wall, with an arched entrance porch to the west and a range of dwellings. The castle was much enlarged in about 1596 by Robert, 4th Lord Sempill, and was dismantled towards the end of the 18th century. The monument is now situated adjacent to a large country house and is surrounded by mature trees.

We note that the site is located approximately 95m south-west of the monument. However, given the presence of the intervening trees, we consider that it unlikely that development in this location would have a significant impact on the setting of the monument.

CFS66 – Main Road, Fairlie

This site is located adjacent to Inventory Designed Landscape (GDL233). We consider that development in this location is likely to have a significant impact on the setting of the Kelburn Castle GDL. The coastal setting on the Firth of Clyde is a key element in the design and setting of the designed landscape, which focuses on the views to the west. The development site is visible in these important views west from the estate and we would therefore not wish to see this site allocated for development.

CFS67 – Shore Lodge and Walled Garden

This site is located within the Brodick Castle Inventory Designed Landscape (GDL71) and contains a number of Category C listed nursery buildings and structures (LB6777). We consider that development in this location is likely to have a significant detrimental impact on the Brodick Castle GDL and its associated listed buildings.

In particular, we note that development will impact upon the 1769 4-sided irregular walled garden. The walled garden houses the Nursery which was an important component in the Brodick Estate providing both saplings for timber aforestation and ornamental varieties for the pleasure gardens. It was also used for food production and as a general service area. A tree nursery appears to have existed on the site by the time the enclosing wall was built in 1769, with a further nursery area to the NE, outside the wall. It is believed to have taken over the role of kitchen garden when the Walled Garden below the castle was laid out as pleasure grounds in the mid-19th century. We would therefore not wish to see this site allocated for development.

CFS70 – Ardeer Peninsula

We note that this substantial urban infill site contains the Category B listed former South Africa Pavilion (LB19136). This structure dates from 1938 and we would welcome development that would ensure its restoration and reuse. Proposals should endeavour to make the building the focal point of any new development with design being sensitive to the setting of the building. We would be happy to work with the Council on any development briefs for this site.

CFS81 – Irvine Harbourside

We consider that this potential allocation is a good opportunity to strengthen and enhance the historic street front of Irvine Harbourside. In particular, we would welcome a sensitive approach to development that incorporates the restoration of the category C listed Harbour Masters Office (LB35448). Development near the Harbour Pilot House (LB35449) should afford the protection and enhancement the buildings setting. Sensitive reuse of the building itself would be welcomed.

Historic Environment Scotland 2 November 2016

Our ref: PCS/149398 Your ref: N/A

If telephoning ask for: North Ayrshire Council Legal and Regulatory Services Cunninghame House Friars Croft Irvine KA12 8EE 01 December 2016

By email only to: [email protected]

Dear Sir

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Acts Local Development Plan 2 Call for Sites, North Ayrshire Council

Thank you for your consultation email which SEPA received on 07 November 2016, in respect of the above matters.

I can confirm that we have completed our assessment of all of the allocations that are being considered as development sites in the new LDP. Our comments are primarily focussed on providing you with details on the potential flood risk and the impacts to the water environment associated with each allocation. We have also taken into account the proposed use and the land classification of the site when providing these comments.

We have also offered additional co-location comments for a number of sites which highlight the location chosen for development purposes is in proximity to an existing facility which, although it may be subject to regulatory controls, still the has the potential to be the source of nuisance conditions (e.g. odour and noise).

Please note that this response letter supersedes our ‘Interim Response’ dated 23 November 2016.

Flood Risk In terms of the detailed assessment undertaken by us we can confirm that there are two sites that we object to in principle on the grounds of flood risk and we recommend that these sites are removed from the sites being considered for inclusion within LDP2, these sites are CFS22 and CFS82.

We would also highlight that there are a considerable number of other sites where additional site investigation studies will be required to better understand the developable footprint of the site, e.g. Flood Risk Assessments. It should be acknowledged that the number of units/scale of development projected or achievable at these sites could be reduced as a result of the findings of the FRA. We would advise that the requirement for the provision of further flood risk information is applicable to 54 of the sites currently being considered by the planning authority.

The Water Environment In addition to the constraints imposed by flooding (no development in the functional floodplain) we also expect developers to work with the water environment when designing their site layout and when considering the infrastructure requirements necessary to service the site. We will also expect appropriate SUDS to be adopted, the naturalness of watercourses to be retained and that appropriate buffer zones should be incorporated to protect the riparian zone of the watercourses, which includes the bed and banks of the stream. We would also confirm that in principle we will not support hard engineering measures on development sites, (e.g. the culverting of watercourses for land gain purposes) we would however be willing to consider, if suitably justified, culverting works that are fundamental to the delivery of a development, e.g. the construction of a bridging structure to provide suitable access.

Additionally, we consider that connection to the public sewerage system is the most sustainable and preferred option for disposal of foul drainage. Therefore, where there is a public sewerage system, waste water from allocations within and close to settlement should be directed to that system. It is our view that a holistic approach should be taken with regards to sewerage capacity in consultation with Scottish Water. Whilst individual allocations may be accommodated onto the existing network those settlements subject to multiple development proposals may require further studies or analysis to ensure the proposed land use strategy can be accommodated without detriment to the water environment.

Further detailed comment is included within our finalised LDP spreadsheet. Please note this has focused on larger sites.

Co-location issues Our advice on the sites likely to be adjacent to existing facilities which may be a potential source of nuisance (e.g. odour/noise issues) is included within our LDP spreadsheet.

The Control of Major Accidents Hazards (COMAH) We note that sites CFS04 and CFS05 are extensions to an existing Top Tier COMAH installation. Whilst the legislative requirements will not alter as a result of the proposals, once detailed proposals are available the applicant will be required to notify the joint Competent Authorities (the Health and Safety Executive and SEPA) of the development.

It is noted that site CFS43 is in the vicinity of the Chivas bonded warehousing site at Willowyard; this is an existing top tier COMAH site. Although the housing proposed will be no closer to the warehousing than the existing housing developments, it will potentially place more people at risk in the event of a fire and as such we recommend that the HSE be consulted on the proposal.

Ardeer Peninsula (CFS70) It is noted that, at an estimated 2,000 dwellings, the proposals at Ardeer Peninsula could represent a significant development opportunity within North Ayrshire. We would expect that appropriate flood risk and drainage assessments be undertaken to inform the development footprint of the site and to protect the water environment. We would also highlight that the scale of this proposal offers the opportunity to implement a low carbon energy distribution network and district heating.

SEPA would welcome the opportunity to be consulted on any pre planning, or masterplanning exercise, undertaken for the Ardeer Peninsula should it go forward. We would also highlight that there are a number of regulated processes (including COMAH establishments) on site which will require consideration in terms of appropriate buffer distances. As detailed plans come forward we would therefore wish to comment on the potential implications of the development on these existing regulated processes.

Contaminated Land Please note that the Local Authority is the lead authority in relation to contaminated land and we therefore recommend that you consult your Environmental Services Department and those responsible for implementing the contaminated land regime regarding the proposed sites.

Allocation Spreadsheet Our detailed comments on all of the above matters are provided in the spreadsheet attached to this correspondence. It is hoped that the rationale to our approach is easy to follow and interpret, however, if you have any concerns with regard to the information and advice provided please do not hesitate to contact me.

If you have any queries relating to this letter, please contact me by telephone on or by e-mail to

Yours sincerely

Planning Service

Enclosure (attached ‘NAC LDP2 SEPA Site Assessment Spreadsheet’)

Disclaimer This advice is given without prejudice to any decision made on elements of the proposal regulated by us, as such a decision may take into account factors not considered at this time. We prefer all the technical information required for any SEPA consents to be submitted at the same time as the planning or similar application. However, we consider it to be at the applicant's commercial risk if any significant changes required during the regulatory stage necessitate a further planning application or similar application and/or neighbour notification or advertising. We have relied on the accuracy and completeness of the information supplied to us in providing the above advice and can take no responsibility for incorrect data or interpretation, or omissions, in such information. If we have not referred to a particular issue in our response, it should not be assumed that there is no impact associated with that issue. For planning applications, if you did not specifically request advice on flood risk, then advice will not have been provided on this issue. Further information on our consultation arrangements generally can be found on our website planning pages.

Local Development Plan Flood Risk Hydrology (FRH) Guidance Notes and Caveats

As outlined in SEPA’s Interim Position Statement on Planning and Flooding – July 2009, we will work with planning authorities to ensure that development plans afford due weight to flood risk and thereby:

 promote flood risk avoidance in the first instance;  include development proposals that are both free from significant flood risk from any source and do not materially increase the probability of flooding elsewhere;  ensure that such proposals are robust in relation to climate change predictions; and,  detail how unavoidable impacts will be mitigated and delivered.

We have recently reprioritised our Planning Service to ensure that we are well placed to engage early in the plan preparation process. Our role will be to provide clear and consistent advice to planning authorities on flood risk within their area, based on the information we hold and information they provide to us. If we are to be in a position to accept in principle the development proposals contained in adopted plans, we need to be satisfied that planning authorities have afforded due weight to flood risk throughout the plan preparation. If due weight has been given to flood risk throughout the plan preparation then once a new style development plan is adopted, we will not revisit the principle of development, but may comment on the detail of the proposed execution. However, we do reserve the right to change our position if new or additional information on flooding becomes available that could materially effect the principle of development.

If no information is available on the classification of Greenfield/Brownfield, it has been assumed. Any advice provided is based on these assumptions. If the Local Authority has additional information, we would be happy to provide additional advice.

In terms of sustainable flood management, the starting point for development plans should be avoidance of flood risk as this represents the most sustainable solution. For information, we would object in principle to any new development significantly within undeveloped/sparsely developed 1 in 200 year flood plain (i.e. Greenfield), in accordance with Scottish Planning Policy.

Where there has been insufficient information provided with the consultation for us to assess flood risk from fluvial and coastal sources to allocated sites or change to a more vulnerable use, we will object. We would normally recommend at scoping stage that a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) was carried out to inform the planning process. A SFRA is the collation of all existing flood risk information to enable a comprehensive understanding of the flood risk in the area and to identify areas which are free from the risk of flooding and therefore suitable for future development. At strategic level, part of the SFRA could also be the identification of priority areas for more detailed analysis in the future.

As an alternative to an SFRA, to establish the principle of development for these sites, we would recommend that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) or other appropriate information is submitted in support of the suggested allocations.

Other appropriate information may be provided in a basic FRA and could include information on;

 a masterplan layout of the development site,  pre and post development site levels with finished floor levels related to nearby watercourses,  appropriate photographs and/or  any nearby historical flood levels.

However if this information is insufficient to provide a robust assessment of the risk of flooding then a strategic or detailed flood risk assessment may need to be carried out by a suitably qualified professional.

Please note that flood risk from watercourses smaller than those found on the Ordnance Survey 1:25 000 maps have not been considered and that there may be risk from watercourses shown on the 1:10 000 maps and from watercourses which are not shown on the Ordnance Survey maps and we would recommend that the Council consult their internal Flood Prevention Officer who may have further information on local flooding issues.

In December 2011, SEPA published the National Flood Risk Assessment (NFRA) required by the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009. The NFRA identifies areas that are potentially vulnerable to flood risk (Potentially Vulnerable Areas or PVAs). This information does not imply that all sites within a PVA are subject to flood risk.

The NFRA datasets will in future help to support Flood Risk Management Planning by 2015. Development Plans will require to have regard to Flood Risk Management Plans.

We have considered the strategic information in the FRMA with respect to PVA locations within the development plan area and would advise that the location of this Development Plan is within PVA(s) 11. The key information available in the FRMA for these PVAs includes:

 Summary of main impacts (for each PVA) Main sources of flood risk (for each PVA)  Number of existing properties currently at risk (for each PVA)

Any locations within a Development Plan outwith a PVA, should not be assumed to be free from flood risk. SEPA has produced the NFRA as the first stage of the Flood Risk Management Planning process. This sub-catchment area is not included as a PVA because it is below the threshold of significance of the NFRA/PVA method. LUPS-DP-SS1 : SEPA's review of proposed site allocations - Call for Sites Stage for North Ayrshire Council LDP2 on boundary NOTE: This spreadsheet is designed to be opened in Microsoft Excel 2010 - the pre-populated filters will not work if opened in an earlier version. SCOTTISH ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AGENCY Identifier: LUPS‐DP‐SS Caveat 1: The comments contained in this spreadsheet are based on information held by us in our GIS system and internal databases. The information has not been ground truthed. If you are concerned about any of the comments or identify potential errors please contact us. Land Use Planning System SEPA Development Plan Spreadsheet Issue No: Version 3 Caveat 2: The sites have been assessed against the SEPA Flood Maps (published in January 2014). The Flood Maps have been produced following a consistent, nationally-applied methodology for Issue date: 04/08/2015 catchment areas equal to or greater than 3km2 using a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) to define river corridors and low-lying coastal land. The maps are indicative and designed to be used as a strategic tool to assess, flood risk at the community level and to support planning policy and flood risk management in Scotland. Guidance on SEPA engagement with the development plan process Originator: Katherine Lakeman For further information please visit: http://www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_maps.aspx Authorised by: Alan Farquhar

Caveat 3: Planning authorities should make contact with colleagues in the Roads Department and Scottish Water with regards to sites at surface water flood risk.

PCS Reference Number: PCS/149398 Initial consultation at Pre MIR Initial consultation at Pre MIR Initial consultation at Pre MIR Site Background Information (to be supplied by planning authority) Technical Review of Flood Risk Site Review: Water Environment Site Reivew: Co-location

Planning staff to complete FR Hydrology staff to compete Local Operations staff to complete Planning staff to complete Local Opertions staff to complete Planning staff to complete

Site Reference Settlement Site Name Easting NorthingProposed Number of Planning Developed, Area of Site Increasing Site within Allocation Watercourse Potential Additional Information SEPA Formal flood Is there a water Land Use Units Permission Undeveloped or vulnerability (if Potentially potentially at catchment less development of holds e.g. historic record of defences present Mitigation required to make the site acceptable on body within, Mitgation required to make the site acceptable and avoid Co-location position and required If answer yes to any of the 4 questions below please provide details of pressure(s) and mitigationONLY COMPLETE BOXES BELOW IF YES TO ANY OF status Sparsley brownfield) Vulnerable medium to high risk than 3km2 hence allocation could flooding from any source / post and current Flood risk detailed comments FR grounds. forming part of the Detailed comments on Water Environment adverse effects on the water environment Co-location issues mitigation required or improvement measures in the Detailed Comments on Water Environment column THE LAST 4 GREEN BOXES developed area Area of flooding (within not modelled in increase the flood survey / Approved Local standard of Only answer yes to 1 of option A or B site boundary, or (Only answer yes to B or C if the answer to A is no) Only anwser yes to 1 box (Needs to be or adjacent to Indicative Flood probability of Authority or SEPA Flood protection immediately determined by indicative 1 in 200 Map flooding Studies Detailed comments including aspects for consideration OPTION A: OPTION B: ADVISORY ONLY: adjacent to the Would waste water drainage from the site What are the Are there any formal Are there any This column should be used to A. Recommend removal of B. Location acceptable C. Allocation Is the site Detailed comments on co-location Highlight to local authority Recommend removal Local Authority) flood outline) or at elsewhere in site specific FRA e.g. Structures complicate Flood Recommend Assessment of Surface Water site? either exacerbate an existing point source current improvement further Name of water Baseline or Water body ID Water body 1.provide an overview of issues where you consider that an site as it is likely to lead to subject to certain acceptable but adjacent or within issues with SEPA regulated sites that site is in vicinity of a of site due to co- flood risk from Risk at site e.g. bridges, culverts etc Please removal from flood risk Hazard - this sewage pressure or create a new pressure in pressures on measures set opportunities for body Non-baseline? status allocation could not be implemented without a deterioration inthe deterioration in the requirements (defined encourage further the vicnity of a licensed site which may location with regulated another source If yes, go on to identify where appropriate FR relevant development plan (detailed required column is to Sewerage Sewerage Private the water body against the water improvement we the status of the water body or development would result in astatus of a water body or in detailed comments improvement SEPA regulated result in a loss of amenity process/ activity which complete requirements are attached in order that we can support report from FRH highlight to the PA treatment network drainage issue that could be body set thorugh the should be failure to put in place the necessary improvements set prevent a water body on water environment opportunities over site? OR and residual nuisance is likely to cause these in our response required to justify the fact that a remaining water exacerbated or river basin planning encouraging (eg achieving the improvements column) that will and above those OR fora licensed site which nuisance even with works capacity against the water body through the RBMP process (separate Is the this request) surface water environment addressed by process that the site morphological set against it through the prevent any formally set against may result in a loss of regulatory controls in capacity issues response required to expand on these issues) development hazard has been columns. issues theproposed allocation could help improvements, river basin planning process downgrading in water it through the RBMP amenity and residual place (separate report, 2 Highlight requirements that will need implemented proposed in the The site is <1km to a WML waste transfer site. The site is <2km to a We hold a record of flooding in PPC Part A site, Anaerobic proximity of the site in Housing - Parts previously A minor watercourse with potentially culverted sections digestion Plant. This site has had November 1999 attributed to a Further discharge of sewage effluent to the small burn at The De CFS01 Dalry The Den 232534 651219 approx 12 12 None dev - Cottages 48751 Yes No urface water – small p adjacent to site Yes None flows along the site boundary which could represent a No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Point source No Yes Unnamed Non-baseline No id Yes odour complaints periodically. The blocked/collapsed culverted may not be possible. units (Historic maps) potential flood risk. site is <2km to a PPC Part A landfill watercourse. site with the potential to cause odour issues. It is <2km form PPC Part B site Anderson Stewart Castings. Field to north of Housing - 2 A minor watercourse flows along the site boundary immediately CFS02 Whiting Bay Margareoch (St 204554 627001 2 None Undeveloped 11404 No Yes, 12/08 No on boundary Yes None None No Yes No No No No None No No No units which could represent a potential flood risk. adjacent Margarets) Site to East of Housing - 4 CFS03 225512 643511 4 None Undeveloped 7218 No Yes, 12/03 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No No No Sharphill Cottage units Industrial - expansion of maturation Area A, land warehouse adjacent to site. 20 Small watercourse flows through allocation and Chivas Brothers CFS04 237698 652584 warehouses, 0 None Undeveloped 137286 No No No going through site Yes None None potential flood risk from this source should be taken No Yes No Ltd., Balgray floor area cognisance of within a Flood Risk Assessment Bond, Nr 50,000sq.m. Gateside & associated infrastructur e. Industrial - expansion of maturation Area B, land warehouse adjacent to site. 20 Fluvial - adjacent to 1 in 200 flood outline. A basic FRA Chivas Brothers CFS05 Beith 237742 651748 warehouses, 0 None Undeveloped 48763 No No Fluvial - adjacent to None Yes None None consisting of topographic information in the first No Yes No Ltd., Balgray floor area instance and a detailed layout plan will be required. Bond, Nr 50,000sq.m. Gateside & associated infrastructur e. Housing/Co mmunity Centre - 45 We hold a record of river units as flooding in proximity of the site enabling in August 2008 causing developmen flooding of fields, gardens and Barrmill t for isolated property flooding. An A minor watercourse with potentially culverted sections Allocation could be implemented but foul drainage must connect Community and Community culverted through area of ponded water is in Two WML sites within 1km of site. CFS06 Barrmill 236564 651515 45 None Undeveloped 43338 No No No Yes None flows through the site which could represent a potential No Yes No Yes Yes No No Point source No No Unnamed Trib Non-baseline to the public sewer. Current capacity of Barrmill STW to accept Yes Residential Centre site relatively close proximity to the One WML landfill within 2km of site. flood risk. further drainage is unknown. Development project proposed development. The including nature of it is uncertain so market could potentially represent a garden, residual flood risk. landscaped areas & wind turbine A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Old Toll House, Housing - Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. WML/L pet crematoria and a service CFS07 Irvine 234488 641227 100 None Undeveloped 33234 No Yes, 12/06 None Yes None None No No Yes No Yes Lochlibo Road 100 units small part Appropriate surface water management measures station within 2km. should be adopted. A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Housing - Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. immediately CFS08 West Kilbride Chapelton Road 220720 647157 120 None Undeveloped 64492 No Yes, 12/03 None Yes None None No No Yes No No No 120 units small part Appropriate surface water management measures adjacent should be adopted. A minor watercourse with potentially culverted sections Housing - flows through the site which could represent a potential Eco housing Surface water – flood risk. A surface water flood hazard has been CFS09 West Kilbride 219682 648318 79 None Undeveloped 26199 No Yes, 12/03 adjacent to site Yes None None No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Wildcat Burn Non-baseline Recommend deculverting of the Wildcat Burn. No Road to protect small part identified and should be discussed with FPA and farmland Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. We hold multiple records of flooding in proximity of the site Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain Site to the South Housing - 4 CFS10 Whiting Bay 204255 625409 4 None Undeveloped 2944 No Yes, 12/08 Fluvial - part None Yes attributed to both fluvial and None of the Glenashdale Burn. No development should take No Yes No No No No No No of Glenbrook units coastal sources. place within this area. Flood Risk Assessment required

School Portencross CFS11 West Kilbride 220279 648549 rolling drop 0 None Undeveloped 4497 No Yes, 12/03 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No Road off area An area of ponded water is in relatively close proximity to the A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Pennyburn Previously Surface water – proposed development. The should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. CFS12 228082 642631 Filter lane 0 None 1368 No No None Yes None No No Yes Roundabout Developed small part nature of it is uncertain so could Appropriate surface water management measures potentially represent a residual should be adopted. flood risk. An area of ponded water is in relatively close proximity to the A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Pennyburn Roundabout Surface water – proposed development. The should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. CFS13 Stevenston 227938 642446 0 None Undeveloped 2429 No No None Yes None No No Yes Roundabout bypass adjacent to nature of it is uncertain so could Appropriate surface water management measures potentially represent a residual should be adopted. flood risk. Housing - 80 Previously Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain units on Developed - Stevenston Development must respect the Stevenston Burn and should be CFS14 Stevenston Kerelaw 226754 642854 80 None 143395 No Yes. 12/03 Fluvial - part None Yes None None of the Stevenston Burn. No development should take No Yes No Yes No No No None No No Baseline Moderate allocated Former Kerelaw Burn set back from the edge of the watercourse. place within this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. RES2 site School A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Wood Farm, Housing - Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. CFS15 Kilwinning 230005 644380 173 None Undeveloped 66908 No Yes, 12/05 None Yes None None No No Yes No No No No None No No Dalry Road 173 units part Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. We hold a record of flooding in A minor watercourse flows through the site which could Within 2 km of the site there is a N-W part of N-W proximity of the site in represent a potential flood risk. A surface water flood PPC Part A (DSM chemical works), Housing or Surface water – Unnamed CFS16 Dalry field at Highfield 230970 650207 34 None Undeveloped 11223 No Yes, 12/04 going through site Yes November 2009 attributed to None hazard has been identified and should be discussed No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes None No No Non-baseline There should be no culverting of the watercourses. Yes a PPC Part B (Cement batching Mixed Use part watercourses Farm fluvial flooding. with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface plant) and a WML Waste transfer water management measures should be adopted. station (Drew Howie, Dalry) Within 1km there is a PPC Part B A minor watercourse flows adjacent to the site which We hold a record of flooding in (Carsehead foundry). Within 2 km of could represent a potential flood risk. A surface water Gap Site at proximity of the site in the site there is a PPC Part A (DSM Surface water – flood hazard has been identified and should be CFS17 Dalry Highfield Village 230889 650124 Housing 2 None Undeveloped 677 No Yes, 12/04 adjacent to site Yes November 2009 attributed to None No Yes Yes Yes chemical works), a PPC Part B adjacent to discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate (on C99 road) fluvial flooding. (Cement batching plant) and a WML surface water management measures should be Waste transfer station (Drew Howie, adopted. Dalry) Part of site Within 1km there is two PPC Part B Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain previously immediately sites (cement batcher and foundry). CFS18 Dalry Bridgend 229553 649234 Housing 39 None 13165 Yes No Fluvial - part None Yes None None of the River Garnock. No development should take No Yes No No No No None No No (Rye W to Caaf Baseline Poor Yes developed - adjacent Within 2km there is PPC Part A place within this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. W) Manse/Garden (DSM chemical works) Minor watercourses flow adjacent to the site which Consent for Within 1 km there is a PPC Part B could represent a potential flood risk. A surface water Conversion of (service station). Within 2km there is Surface water – flood hazard has been identified and should be CFS19 West Bankside 230799 654862 Housing 575 barn & 4 Undeveloped 191731 No Yes, 12/04 adjacent to site Yes None None No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Bankside Burn Non-baseline Development should respect the burn. Yes a WML (waste transfer site. small part discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate Houses on Paddockholm Rd Civic Amenity surface water management measures should be part site). adopted. Land to the south Within 2km there are two PPC Part of West Kilbride Housing 100 B sites (cement batcher and foundry) CFS20 Dalry Road (B780) and 228237 649124 100 None Undeveloped 44568 No No No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No No No No None No No Yes units and a PPC Part A (DSM chemical south west of works) Kittyshaw Road Partly within the 1 in 200 year floodplain of the Caaf Land to the south Water and a minor watercourse also flows adjacent to of the B714 the site. No development should take place within this Within 2km there are two PPC Part Application for (opposite Trinity Housing - 20 Surface water / area. Flood Risk Assessment required. A surface wate B sites (cement batcher and foundry) CFS21 Dalry 228853 648692 25 PP refused Undeveloped 12595 No No adjacent to site Yes None None No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Caaf Water Baseline Moderate Development should be set back from watercourse. Yes Drive)and to the 25 units fluvial – all flood hazard has been identified and should be and a PPC Part A (DSM chemical 1994 west of A737 discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate works) Kilwinning Road surface water management measures should be adopted. Fully within the 1 in 200 year floodplain of the River Housing - 90 Within 1km 2PPC Part B (metal Garnock. A surface water flood hazard has been units already Part of site processing and coating activities, identified and should be discussed with FPA and Grahamston in Housing previously Surface water / We have multiple records of immediately printing, textile treatments). Within CFS22 231584 653172 90 None 39458 Yes Yes, 12/04 None Yes None Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water Yes No No No No No None No No Yes Avenue Land Audit - developed - fluvial – all historical flooding in this area. adjacent 2km there is a WML (waster transfer management measures should be adopted. New NA 0512 & manse/garden station at Paddockholm) and a PPC development within this area is therefore viewed as un- NA 0537 Part B (service station) acceptable. Ardeer Composting facility. WML/W/0022029 BPI Previously The site lies adjacent to the 1 in 200 year floodplain of Former ICI Nylon PPC/W/0020024. Stevenston STW Housing - 20 Developed - Car the River Garnock. No development should take place CFS23 Stevenston Salts Plant car 227491 641329 20 None 6941 Yes Yes, 12/03 Fluvial - adjacent to adjacent to site Yes None None No Yes No No No No No None No No Yes CAR/L/1003264. Chemring units park, ICI Nylon within this area. Minor watercourse also adjacent to park Energetics UK Ltd. WML Waste Works site. Flood Risk Assessment required. transfer station (Boyd Brothers, Moorpark Rd). Small watercourse flows through allocation and Land at Sorbie Housing - Surface water – We have multiple records of unnamed Development should respect the watercourse. The watercourse CFS24 Saltcoats 224702 643599 500 None Undeveloped 325759 No Yes, 12/03 going through site Yes None potential flood risk from this source should be taken No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Non-baseline No Farm, Sharphill 500 units part historical flooding in this area. watercourse should not be culverted. cognisance of within a Flood Risk Assessment. Site to the south Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain Housing - 12 CFS25 Whiting Bay east of Woodlea 204337 625400 15 None Undeveloped 7536 No Yes, 12/08 Fluvial - part None Yes None None of the Glenashdale Burn. No development should take No Yes No No No No No None No No No 15 units Cottage place within this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. Minor watercourse adjacent to site. A basic FRA, consisting of topographic information in the first instance and a detailed layout plan will be required. A Housing - Surface water – CFS26A Kilwinning Area 1 Whitehirst 229002 644145 140 None Undeveloped 46268 No Yes, 12/05 None Yes None None surface water flood hazard has been identified and No Yes Yes No No No No None No No No 140 units small part should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Housing - 35 Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. CFS26B Kilwinning Area 2 Whitehirst 228818 643988 35 None Undeveloped 11837 No Yes, 12/05 None Yes None None No No Yes No No No No None No No No units small part Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. Minor watercourse adjacent to site. A basic FRA, consisting of topographic information in the first Within 2km there is two PPC Part B Site To West Of Mixed Use - instance and a detailed layout plan will be required. A (2x service stations), 2 WML (Waste Surface water – CFS27 Ardrossan Dalry Road, 223221 644268 Housing/Ret 0 None Undeveloped 52573 No Yes, 12/03 going through site Yes None None surface water flood hazard has been identified and No Yes Yes No No No No None No No Yes transfer station and landfill at High small part Chapelhill ail/Leisure should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Boydston Farm) and a PPC Part B Appropriate surface water management measures (mobile plant). should be adopted. Within 1km the is 5x PPC Part B App'n for 9 permits (Oil depot, 2x cement Retail unit Site to the east Flats refused, batcher, 2x mobile plant, mineral CFS28 Brodick 201813 635939 (Bike hire) & 0 Undeveloped 711 No Yes, 12/08 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No Yes of Craiglea Court appeal activities) and one WML (waste Caf├® refused 2009 transfer station) and within 2km there is also a WML (landfill site). Tourism/Re sidential - tourist Within 2 km the is 5x PPC Part B accommoda multiple Multiple minor watercourses flow through or along the permits (Oil depot, 2x cement tion Minor unnamed CFS29 Brodick Ormidale South 201179 635653 0 None Undeveloped 20961 No Yes, 12/08 No watercourses Yes None None site boundary which could represent a potential flood No Yes No Yes No No No None No No Non-baseline Site drainage must connect to public sewerage system. Yes batcher, 2x mobile plant, mineral (glamping/se watercourses through site risk. A Flood Risk Assessment is required. activities) a WML (waste transfer lf catering station) and a WML (landfill site). units) & staff accommoda tion None - prior consent for Previously CFS30 West Kilbride WK car park 220490 648414 Car Park 0 3174 No Yes, 12/03 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No housing Dec Developed 2007 Expansion of hotel Within 2 km the is 5x PPC Part B business - multiple Multiple minor watercourses flow through or along the Any expansion of this site should be accompanied by an permits (Oil depot, 2x cement immediately CFS31 Brodick Ormidale Hotel 201137 635761 annexe/chal 0 None Undeveloped 6797 No Yes, 12/08 No watercourses Yes None None site boundary which could represent a potential flood No Yes No No Yes None No No Glencloy Water Baseline Good upgrading of the sewage treatment facilities or consideration Yes batcher, 2x mobile plant, mineral adjacent ets/staff through site risk. A Flood Risk Assessment is required. should be given to connection to the public sewer. activities) a WML (waste transfer accommoda station) and a WML (landfill site). tion Within 1 km the is 4x PPC Part B permits (Oil depot, cement batcher, Application 2x mobile plant). Within 2km there is Site to the south Housing - 1 Previously CFS32 Brodick 201773 635911 1 Refused April 536 Unknown Yes, 12/08 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No Yes a PPC Part B (cement batcher, of Craiglea Court unit Developed 2016 mineral activities) a WML (waste transfer station) and a WML (landfill site). A minor watercourse flows through the site which could Housing - 75 CFS33 Whiting Bay North Kiscadale 204400 626845 75 None Undeveloped 38785 No Yes, 12/08 No going through site Yes None None represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk Assessment No Yes No Yes No No No None No No No units required. A minor watercourse flows through the site which could Housing - 70 CFS34 Whiting Bay Knockankelly 204318 627292 70 None Undeveloped 36044 No Yes, 12/08 No going through site Yes None None represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk Assessment No Yes No Yes No No No None No No No units required. A minor watercourse flows through on boundary of site Land to the west which could represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk Housing - of Wingfaulds Surface water – Assessment required. A surface water flood hazard has immediately Within 2km of PPC Part A (DSM CFS35 Dalry 227991 649705 100-150 150 None Undeveloped 52446 No No on boundary Yes None None No Yes Yes No No No None No No Putyan Burn Non-baseline Yes Avenue/Fairlie small part been identified and should be discussed with FPA and adjacent chemical works). units Moor Road Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted.

We would expect the foul drainage from this site to be connected to the public sewer. While this site on its own may not be an issu Housing - but when considered with other proposals for CFS36 Blackwaterfoot Rockfield 189335 628521 16 None Undeveloped 33455 No No No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No No Yes Yes No None No No No 16+ units there may be issues around capacity in the public septic tanks and impacts on overflows at the pumping station. Scottish Water need to confirm that sufficient capacity exists.

We would expect the foul drainage from this site to be connected to the public sewer. While this site on its own may not be an issu Fluvial - adjacent to 1 in 200 flood outline of Black Black Housing - but when considered with other proposals for Blackwaterfoot CFS37 Blackwaterfoot Burnside 189772 628416 26 None Undeveloped 36866 No No Fluvial - adjacent to going through site Yes None None Water. A minor watercourse also flows through the site No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes None No No Water/Clauchan Baseline Poor No 26+ units there may be issues around capacity in the public septic tanks A Flood Risk Assessment required. Water and impacts on overflows at the pumping station. Scottish Water need to confirm that sufficient capacity exists. This site on its own may not be an issue but when considered Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. with other proposals for Blackwaterfoot there may be issues Housing - 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.51m CFS38 Blackwaterfoot Seafield 189824 627975 22 None Undeveloped 13708 No No Coastal - part None Yes None No development should take place within this area. No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes None No No South arran Baseline Good around capacity in the public septic tanks and impacts on No 22+ units AOD. Flood Risk Assessment required. overflows at the pumping station. Scottish Water need to confirm that sufficient capacity exists. Housing Sewage disposal may be difficult here as there are only small Dippin Road, (self build CFS39 Dippin 204486 622367 15 None Undeveloped 23795 No Yes, 12/08 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No No No Yes None No No watercourses in the area. A holistic approach should be taken to No Mayfield Farm plots) - 15 the drainage issues. units Housing - 1 CFS40 Blairbeg 202909 631703 1 None Undeveloped 3995 No Yes, 12/08 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No unit Previousl Adjacent to the 1 in 200 year floodplain. No The discharge of treated sewage effluent should be made to Merkland Bridge Housing - 10 Developed - Coastal - adjacent 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.62m unnamed CFS41 Brodick 202251 638390 10 None 6451 No No adjacent to site Yes None development should take place within this area. Flood No Yes No Yes No No Yes None No No Non-baseline Brodick Bay beyond MLWS and not to the small watercourse No site units Former Caravan to AOD. watercourse Risk Assessment required. adjacent to the site. Site Mount Pleasant Previously A small part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year Housing - 2 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.60m CFS42 Lamlash Farm and 203932 632248 2 None Developed - 4536 Yes Yes, 12/08 Coastal - small part None Yes None floodplain. No development should take place within No Yes No or more AOD. Cottage Steading & Barns this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. Land to the north Housing - of Willowyards Foul drainage to the public sewer and adoption of appropriate Knowes Farm landfill site CFS43 Beith 234004 653469 100-125 125 None Undeveloped 66561 No No No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No Yes Road/West of SUDS required. PPC/W/0020008 odour issues. units Morrishill Drive Housing/Co mmunity A minor watercourse flows adjacent to the site which land to the south Within 2km there is three PPC Part Green could represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk of Kilbirnie Place Area indicated as marshland so B permits (metal processing, coating Space. 100- Surface water – Assessment required. A surface water flood hazard has Unnamed CFS44 Kilbirnie Golf 230886 653583 125 None Undeveloped 38545 No Yes, 12/04 adjacent to site Yes potential for groundwater None No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Non-baseline Development should respect the watercourse Yes activities, printing, and a service 125 units & small part been identified and should be discussed with FPA and watercourse Course/West of flooding. station). There is also a WML potential Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water Newhouse Drive (paddockholm rd civic amenity cite). phase 2 40- management measures should be adopted. 50 units A minor watercourse flows along the site boundary Previously which could represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk Land at Housing, Site currently drains to Carsehead public septic tank. This will Carsehead Foundry Developed- Surface water – Assessment required. A surface water flood hazard has Unnamed CFS45 Dalry Carsehead 230212 649713 retail or 45 None 14867 Unknown No on boundary Yes None None No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No None No No Non-baseline probably need to be upgraded. It would however be preferably if Yes PPC/B/1003230. DSM Miners' Cottages part been identified and should be discussed with FPA and Watercourse Foundry Leisure the development were connected to the public sewers in Dalry. PPC/W/0020037 (Hist Maps) Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. Southview, Housing - 4- CFS46 Shiskine, Isle of 191032 629606 5 None Undeveloped 3459 No No No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No No No No Yes None No No Additional private drainage systems require careful consideration No 5 units Arran. Greenfield, Black There are numerous private sewage discharges in this area . Housing - 10 CFS47 Blackwaterfoot Torbeg, Isle of 189463 628716 12 None Undeveloped 12527 No No No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No No No No Yes None No No Water/Clauchan Baseline Poor Additional discharges may require more than secondary No 12 units Arran. Water treatment. Housing - 86 units including infrastructur e, greenspace, landscaping Partly within 1 in 200 flood outline of Noddsdale Water. Brisbane Glen Surface water / Noddsdale The development must respect the watercourse and should be CFS48 220948 661555 etc & 86 None Undeveloped 69375 No Yes, 12/01 going through site Yes None None A minor watercourse also flows through the site. A No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Baseline Moderate No Road fluvial - part Water set back. carpark to Flood Risk Assessment required. allow easier access to Meridian Pillars & conservator y

Minor watercourses flow along the site boundary which Drainage from the development must connect to the public foul Consent for could represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk sewers in Kilbirnine. Scottish Water must confirm that there is Within 1km there is one PPC Part B Conversion of West Bankside Housing 200- Surface water – Assessment required. A surface water flood hazard has Burnside Burn, sufficient capacity in the sewerage system including the Kilbirnie (service station). Within 2km there is CFS49 Kilbirnie 230824 654859 250 barn & 4 Undeveloped 163373 No Yes, 12/04 adjacent to site Yes None None No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No None No No Non-baseline Yes Farm 250 units small part been identified and should be discussed with FPA and Paduff Burn outfall sewer to accept the additional foul drainage without t a PPC Part B (coating activities, Houses on Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water causing increased spillage to the environment. The development printing and textile treatments). part management measures should be adopted. should be set back from the Burnside Burn. Minor watercourse adjacent to site. A basic FRA, Housing - 2 CFS50 Lamlash Laigh Letter 202402 631085 2 None Undeveloped 12831 No Yes, 12/08 No adjacent to site Yes None None consisting of topographic information in the first No Yes No units instance and a detailed layout plan will be required Within 1km there is a PPC Part B A surface water flood hazard has been identified and (service station). Within 2km there is Housing - Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. CFS51 Saltcoats/Stevenston Mayfield Farm 225580 642403 300 None Undeveloped 138329 No Yes, 12/03 None Yes None None No No Yes No Yes a WML (waste transfer station), 300 units part Appropriate surface water management measures PPC W (abattoir) and two PPC Part should be adopted. B (service station). Lapsed PP A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Land at for Housing Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Knowes Farm landfill site CFS52 Beith Meadowside, 234419 653757 Housing 56 Undeveloped 18781 No No None Yes None None No No Yes Foul to public sewer and adoption of appropriate SUDS required. Yes on part of site small part Appropriate surface water management measures PPC/W/0020008 odour issues. Beith 94/00086/PP should be adopted. Coastal- adjacent to 1 in 200 flood outline. A basic Housing - 1 Coastal - adjacent 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.60m CFS53 Lamlash Fereneze Lodge 204214 632280 1 None Undeveloped 1306 No Yes, 12/08 None Yes None FRA, consisting of topographic information in the first No Yes No unit to AOD. instance and a detailed layout plan will be required. multiple Multiple minor watercourses flow through or along the CFS54 Whiting Bay Land at Ardmhor 204860 624717 Housing 91 None Undeveloped 30245 No Yes, 12/08 No watercourses Yes None None site boundary which could represent a potential flood No Yes No Yes No No Yes Point source No Yes East Arran Baseline Good First time sewerage provision through site risk. A Flood Risk Assessment is required. Minor watercourses adjacent to site. A basic FRA, Housing - 1 CFS55 Lamlash Birchgrove 203081 629692 1 None Undeveloped 992 No Yes, 12/08 No adjacent to site Yes None None consisting of topographic information in the first No Yes No unit instance and a detailed layout plan will be required Site To North Of Housing - A small part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year The Orchards, CFS56 West Kilbride 220988 648559 approx 35 35 None Undeveloped 24855 No Yes, 12/03 Fluvial - small part None Yes None None floodplain. No development should take place within No Yes No No No Law Brae, West units this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. Kilbride Housing - 5 Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. units, flood No development should take place within this area. Site To South Of amelioration Minor watercourse also flows through site which needs Lawoodhead, and Surface water / to be assessed. Flood Risk Assessment required. A CFS57 West Kilbride 221256 648721 5 None Undeveloped 175023 No Yes, 12/03 going through site Yes None None No Yes Yes No Springside, West equestrian/c fluvial - part surface water flood hazard has been identified and Kilbride ommercial should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. developmen Appropriate surface water management measures t should be adopted. Former A minor watercourse flows through the site which could Farmfield Farm None - represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk Assessment Kilbride Burn, Although the Kilbride Burn is slightly remote from the Site, North Of Housing - 16/00397/PP Surface water – required. A surface water flood hazard has been immediately Firthe of Clyde development the capacity of the foul sewer should be queried as CFS58 West Kilbride 221305 647888 280 Undeveloped 138263 No Yes, 12/03 going through site Yes None None No Yes Yes No Yes No None No No Baseline No Ardrossan High 280 units PM refused small part identified and should be discussed with FPA and adjacent ( and there are CSOs from the system which discharge into the Kilbride Road, West Aug 2016 Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water Ardrossan) burn which may impact on the Seamill Bathing Water Kilbride management measures should be adopted. Mixed use - Residential/ Within 2km there are 2 WML A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Tournament Commercial Surface water from this site already drains to the . (Nethermains landfill (Phase III) and Previously Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. immediately CFS59 Irvine Park, Kilwinning 231967 641426 Leisure, 0 None 313270 Unknown Yes, 12/05 None Yes None None No No Yes No No No None No No Lugton Water Baseline The Lugton Water is aUWWTD sensitive river. Appropriate Yes Barthonholm civic amenity site) and Developed part Appropriate surface water management measures adjacent Road, Irvine retail, hotel, SUDS will be required. 2 PPC Part B (dry cleaners and should be adopted. restaurant service station). etc. Adjacent to the 1 in 200 year floodplain. No Newton Shore, None OPP Coastal - adjacent 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.65m Kilbrannan Development will need a private drainage system. Discharging to CFS60 193240 651288 Housing 15 Undeveloped 5161 No No None Yes None development should take place within this area. Flood No Yes No Yes No No Yes None No No Baseline Good No Lochranza refused 2003 to AOD. Sound Kilbrannan Sound beyond MLWS Risk Assessment required. Caravan site - 24-30 Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. trib Monamore Consideration should be given to connection of foul flows to the CFS61 Lamlash Ross Road Field 201454 629960 pitches and 0 None Undeveloped 14815 No Yes, 12/08 Fluvial - small part None Yes None None No development should take place within this area. No Yes No Yes No No Yes None No No Non-baseline No Burn public sewer. toilet/washin Flood Risk Assessment required. g facilities Within I km there is a WML (Restructa Ltd- waste recovery) and a PPC Part B (service station. Within two km there is many PPC Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain permitted activities including (landfill of the . No development should take place site, glass manufacturer, dry cleaner within this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. service station, concrete batching SEPA consulted and reviewed flood risk info 15/00344/PP We hold a record of fluvial plant, metal manufacturing and Land to the east associated with 15/00344/PPPM (circa 59 units) and PPM Surface water / flooding within part of the site The Annick Water is a UWWTD sensitive water body. processing, an mobile plant). There CFS62 Irvine of Hallmark 233244 638540 Housing 340 Undeveloped 113472 No Yes, 12/06 None Yes None understand this has permission subject to a condition No Yes Yes Yes No No No Diffuse source No Annick Water Baseline Poor Yes Residential fluvial - part in December 1994. Appropriate SUDS are required for any surface water run off. is also many WML sites including Hotel requiring an updated FRA to determine developable Development (civic amenity site, filtec waste footprint. A surface water flood hazard has been solutions, end of life vehicles- Irvine identified and should be discussed with FPA and carspares, pet crematoria, lowmac Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water alloys, Ayrshire recycling centre, management measures should be adopted. pulverisation plant, shewalton quarry landfill, shewalton quarry and Tes- Arm (Europe) Ltd. Just outside the 2km radius is PPC Part A (GSK).

A surface water flood hazard has been identified and There is a shellfish production area in Southannan Sands. Part of Underbank, Part of site Largs Channel Housing - 25 Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. immediately the site lies within the Shellfish PA catchment. Southannan Sands Terminal CFS63 Fairlie Southannan 220779 653678 25 None developed for 19908 Yes Yes, 12/03 None Yes None None No No Yes No No Yes None No No (Fairlie Roads), Baseline Good Yes units small part Appropriate surface water management measures adjacent is also a SSSI. All foul drainage from the site must be connected PPC/B/1003186 Estate, Fairlie sawmill Glen Burn should be adopted. to the public sewer. Appropriate SUDS are required. An area of ponded water is in relatively close proximity to the Upper Housing - 60 proposed development. The immediately CFS64 West Kilbride Chapelton, 220590 646926 60 None Undeveloped 35309 No Yes, 12/03 No None No None No flood risk apparent. No No Yes No No No None No No Kilbride Burn Baseline No units nature of it is uncertain so could adjacent Seamill potentially represent a residual flood risk. Minor watercourse adjacent to site. A basic FRA, Housing & consisting of topographic information in the first Portencross Surface water – CFS65 West Kilbride 219880 648405 potential 0 None Undeveloped 234498 No Yes, 12/03 adjacent to site Yes None None instance and a detailed layout plan will be required. A No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Wild Cat Burn Non-baseline No Road small part school site surface water flood hazard has been identified and should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water.

A potentially culverted Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. Lapsed PP watercourse could flow through No development should take place within this area. for Garden Main Road, Surface water / part of the site which could Flood Risk Assessment required. A surface water flood CFS66 Fairlie 220995 656279 Housing 27 Centre/restaur Undeveloped 8904 No Yes, 12/03 going through site Yes None No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Unnanmed Trib Non-baseline Yes Fairlie STW CAR/L/1100178 Fairlie fluvial - part represent a potential flood risk. hazard has been identified and should be discussed ant No built development should be with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface 10/00813/PP proposed over the culvert. water management measures should be adopted. Previously Minor watercourse adjacent to site and adjacent to Shore Lodge Housing - 10 developed- walled Coastal - adjacent 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.62m coastal floodplain. A basic FRA, consisting of Brodick Castle Country Parks STP CFS67 Brodick and Walled 201357 637681 10 None 10923 Yes No adjacent to site Yes None No Yes No No No No No None No No Yes units garden, cottages to AOD. topographic information in the first instance and a CAR/L/1008964 Garden etc. detailed layout plan will be required. Hunterston Terminal National PP for Marine Offshore Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. PPC/B/1003186, TH Fergusson Offshore Wind Construction Previously 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.67m Largs Channel Site is almost surrounded on all sides by water. Southanna Sand CFS68 Fairlie 218747 652952 wind turbine 0 385148 No Yes, 12/03 Coastal - part None Yes None No development should take place within this area. No Yes No Yes No No Yes None No No Baseline Good Yes PPC/B/1003185, Hunterston Power Turbine Test Yard Developed AOD. (Fairlie Roads) is a SSSI test facility Flood Risk Assessment required. Station, Hunterston A Facility 16/00268/pp decommissioning site. A small part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year Within 1km there is WML Retain floodplain. No development should take place within (nethermains landfill) and PPC Part WHM Housing this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. A surface Previously Surface water / immediately B (service station). Within two km CFS69 Kilwinning Nethermains 230520 642463 allocation 100 None 56476 Yes Yes, 12/05 None Yes None None water flood hazard has been identified and should be No Yes Yes No No No None No River Garnock Baseline Yes Developed fluvial – small part adjacent there is PPC Part B ( vehicle Road, Kilwinning RES2(10) - discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate resprayer), WML (Waste treatment- 100 units surface water management measures should be Datec ELV, civic amenity site) adopted. Housing - Rgarnock and Baseline Moderate Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. 2000+ units Irvine Estuary, The drainage form this site must be connected to the pubilc foul Ardeer Composting facility. No development should take place within this area. and Previously Irvine Bay sewer. Although th esite is mainly sand the infiltration of surface WML/W/0022029 BPI multiple Minor watercourses also flow through the site. Flood Combined Developed - Surface water / water may not be acceptable due to potential contamination PPC/W/0020024. Stevenston STW CFS70 Stevenston Ardeer Peninsula 229461 640205 2000 None 9536318 No No watercourses Yes None None Risk Assessment required. A surface water flood No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No Yes Heat & ICI/Nobel fluvial - part issues resulting from the former use. There is a high water table CAR/L/1003264. Chemring through site hazard has been identified and should be discussed Power Explosives Site and ongoing abstraction of ground water due to a high water Energetics UK Ltd. Nethermains with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface energy table. In addition, there is an ongoing explosive manufacture on landfill water management measures should be adopted. station. the peninsula. See Co-Location. Housing & There is a small mill lade which runs through the site. The weir is potential multiple Multiple minor watercourses flow through or along the not being maintained. A number of septic tanks discharge Land at the unnamed trib CFS71 Shiskine 191269 630028 education/c 0 None Undeveloped 14419 No No No watercourses Yes None None site boundary which could represent a potential flood No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Point source No Yes Non-baseline including the Scottish Water tanks discharge to this lade. We No String, Shiskine Black Wter ommercial through site risk. A Flood Risk Assessment is required. cannot allow any further discharges of any quality to the lade. An uses discharge would have to be made direct to the Black Water. West of Alisa Housing - 1 CFS72 Kilmory 196491 621052 1 None Undeveloped 4952 No Yes, 12/08 No None No None None No flood risk apparent. No No No Cottage unit Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year coastal floodplain and a minor partly culverted watercourse is adjacent to the site. No development should take place Chapelton Housing - 90 Surface water / 1 in 200 year CFB level =3.62m within this area. Flood Risk Assessment required. A West Kilbride Sewage Pumping CFS73 West Kilbride Shorefield, 220518 646260 90 None Undeveloped 62819 No Yes, 12/03 adjacent to site Yes None No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Yes units coastal – part AOD. surface water flood hazard has been identified and station CAR/L/1026164 Seamill should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. No development should take place within this area. None. multiple Minor watercourses also flow through the site. Flood Noddsdale Housing - 80 RES2(34) Surface water / Noddsdale CFS74 Largs 220800 661155 80 Undeveloped 72477 No Yes, 12/01 watercourses Yes None None Risk Assessment required. A surface water flood No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No No Meadow units allocation in fluvial - part Water through site hazard has been identified and should be discussed LDP with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted.

A minor watercourse flows through the site which could Within two km there is two WML ( Housing 15 represent a potential flood risk. Flood Risk Assessment landfill and waste transfer station North of 122 Surface water – CFS75 Ardrossan 223611 644310 units & play 15 None Undeveloped 14431 No Yes, 12/03 on boundary Yes None None required. A surface water flood hazard has been No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No No Stanley burn Yes both at High Boydston), and Three Dalry Road small part area identified and should be discussed with FPA and PPC Part B (mobile plant, 2x service Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water manage station) A surface water flood hazard has been identified and Meadowfoot, Housing - 5 Undeveloped - Surface water – should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. CFS76 West Kilbride Ardrossan High 221007 647715 5 None 4042 No Yes, 12/03 None No None None No No Yes units Garden small part Appropriate surface water management measures Road should be adopted. Chemring Energetics. Within 1k there is Three PPC Part B (mobile Fully within the 1 in 200 year floodplain of . plant, glass manufacturing and dry Enlargement We would have concerns about new development cleaners) and one WML (end of life Former Ayrshire of RES 2 (7) Previously within this area particularly if vulnerability increases. Garnock/Irvine This is aUWWTD sensitive waterbody and a SSSI. Appropriate vehicles -Irvine Car Spares). Within CFS77 Irvine Metal Products 231363 638848 221 None 73514 Yes Yes, 12/07 Fluvial - all None Yes None None No Yes Yes Yes No No No None No Yes Baseline Good Yes allocated Developed Flood Risk Assessment and appropriate flood Estuary SUDS required for the surface water run-off. 2 km there is two WML (Waste site site. management strategy required to verify compliance transfer station- Filtec waste with SPP solutions and metal recycling- JR Adam and Sons Ltd ) and four PPC Part B ( service stations)

Developmen A potentially culverted watercourse could flow through t associated part of the site which could represent a potential flood with Previously risk. No built development should be proposed over the decommissi Developed - Surface water – culverted through CFS80 West Kilbride Hunterston A 218124 651300 0 None 719156 No Yes, 12/03 Yes None None culvert. A surface water flood hazard has been No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes None No No Yes Hunterston B power station oning of Ayrshire Metal part site identified and should be discussed with FPA and nuclear Products Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water power management measures should be adopted. station etc.

Housing/To Parts of the site within the 1 in 200 year floodplain of urism - River Irvine. We would have concerns about new This area sits close to Irvine Bathing Water. Any re-development Hotel, PPPM Sept development within this area particularly if vulnerability of this area which is likely to increase foul sewage flows will Ardagh Glass, Commercial - 2015 on part increases. Flood Risk Assessment and appropriate Irvine Bathing Irvine Previously immediately need to be assessed in terms of its impact on the local sewerage sewage pumping station, Chemring CFS81 Irvine 230795 638058 offices/caf ├ 0 site - 175955 Yes Yes, 12/07 Fluvial - part None Yes None None flood management strategy required to verify No Yes Yes No Yes No Point source No Yes Water/ Irvine Baseline Yes Harbourside developed adjacent infrastructure. There must not be any deterioration of Irvine Energetics, Filtec Waste Solution, ®/restaurant 00/00690/PP compliance with SPP. A surface water flood hazard Bay Bathing Water. There must be no increase in the frequency or Irvine Car Spare /retail & PM has been identified and should be discussed with FPA duration of any sewer overflows as a result of this development. health/leisur and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water e uses management measures should be adopted. A substantial part of the site may lie within the 1 in 200 year floodplain of the Caaf Water and River Garnock. River No development should take place within this area. A Garnock~(Rye Within two km is PPC Part A (DSM immediately CFS82 Dalry Lynnholm Farm 229240 648694 Housing 580 None Undeveloped 193231 No No Fluvial - majority None Yes None None surface water flood hazard has been identified and Yes No Yes No No No Diffuse source No Yes Water to Caaf Baseline Good Appropriate SUDS required. Yes chemical works) and two PPC Part adjacent should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Water), Caaf B (cement batcher and foundry). Appropriate surface water management measures Water should be adopted.

1.2 Whilst we acknowledge that this is a previously developed site, redevelopment to a residential use will represent an increase in land use vulnerability. In line with Scottish Planning Policy, and our Land Use Vulnerability Guidance, we do not support this and therefore object to any proposals to increase the vulnerability of the site. Please note whilst it is not apparent that we commented on this site in 2010 we can confirm that this aligns with our advice offered on site CFS77 considered at call for sites stage (letter dated 01 December 2016 under PCS/149398).

1.3 We note that the site is also currently allocated as a mixed use employment area (Policy IND 5). We would not object if an alternative proposal is put forward to develop the site to a similar or less vulnerable use subject to sufficient information being provided to demonstrate that the proposals would have a neutral effect on flood risk.

2. Requirement for a Flood Risk Assessment

2.1 Our analysis of the allocations has found that there are a number of sites where additional site investigation studies will be required to better understand the flood risk constraint and therefore the developable footprint of the site (e.g. Flood Risk Assessments). It should be noted that the number of units/scale of development projected or achievable at these sites could be reduced as a result of the findings of the FRA. We would advise that the requirement for the provision of further flood risk information is applicable to 24 of the sites. These are identified in Column W of the spreadsheet.

2.2 For information, it is apparent we requested FRAs for 16 of these sites in 2010. There is one site, RES2(21) - Drakemyre/Ryeside, Dalry, which now requires a FRA which we advised did not in 2010; this is as our previous advice was based on the Garnock Flood Study which is now 14 years old and would need to be updated in the event that it covered this site. There are a further seven sites which require FRAs where it is not apparent we provided comment previously.

3. Protection of the Water Environment

3.1 Whilst our detailed comments are offered on flood risk at this stage we would highlight that we also expect developers to work with the water environment when designing their site layout and when considering the infrastructure requirements necessary to service the site. In this regard we expect appropriate SUDS to be adopted (this includes sites where the proposed discharge of surface water will be to coastal waters where the discharge is into, close to or liable to impinge on a Designated Bathing Water or shellfish water), the naturalness of watercourses to be retained and that appropriate buffer zones be incorporated to protect the riparian zone of the watercourses, which includes the bed and banks of the stream.

3.2 We would also confirm that in principle we will not support hard engineering measures on development sites, (e.g. the culverting of watercourses for land gain purposes) we would however be willing to consider, if suitably justified, culverting works that are fundamental to the delivery of a development, e.g. the construction of a bridging structure to provide suitable access.

3.3 Additionally, we consider that connection to the public sewerage system is the most sustainable and preferred option for disposal of foul drainage. Therefore, where there is a public sewerage system, waste water from allocations within and close to settlement should be directed to that system. It is our view that a holistic approach should be taken with regards to sewerage capacity in consultation with Scottish Water. Whilst individual allocations may be accommodated onto the existing network those settlements subject to multiple development proposals may require further studies or analysis to ensure the proposed land use strategy can be accommodated without detriment to the water environment.

If you have any queries relating to this letter, please contact me by telephone on 01698 839 000 or by e-mail to [email protected].

Yours sincerely

Senior Planning Officer Planning Service

Enclosure (attached ‘NAC LDP2 SEPA Site Assessment Spreadsheet – Existing Sites’)

Disclaimer This advice is given without prejudice to any decision made on elements of the proposal regulated by us, as such a decision may take into account factors not considered at this time. We prefer all the technical information required for any SEPA consents to be submitted at the same time as the planning or similar application. However, we consider it to be at the applicant's commercial risk if any significant changes required during the regulatory stage necessitate a further planning application or similar application and/or neighbour notification or advertising. We have relied on the accuracy and completeness of the information supplied to us in providing the above advice and can take no responsibility for incorrect data or interpretation, or omissions, in such information. If we have not referred to a particular issue in our response, it should not be assumed that there is no impact associated with that issue. For planning applications, if you did not specifically request advice on flood risk, then advice will not have been provided on this issue. Further information on our consultation arrangements generally can be found on our website planning pages.

Version 2 NOTE: This spreadsheet is designed to be opened in Microsoft Excel 2010 - the pre-populated filters will not work if opened in an earlier version. SCOTTISH ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AGENCY Caveat 1: The comments contained in this spreadsheet are based on information held by us in our GIS system and internal databases. The information has not been ground truthed. If you are concerned about any of the comments or identifyIdentifier: LUPS‐DP‐SS potential errors please contact us. Land Use Planning System SEPA Development Plan Spreadsheet Caveat 2: The sites have been assessed against the SEPA Flood Maps (published in January 2014). The Flood Maps have been produced following a consistent, nationally applied methodology for catchment areas equal to or greate Issue No: Version 3 3km2 using a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) to define river corridors and low-lying coastal land. The maps are indicative and designed to be used as a strategic tool to assess, flood risk at the community level and to support planning policy and flood risk management in Scotland. Issue date: 04/08/2015 Caveat 3: Planning authorities should make contact with colleagues in the Roads Department and Scottish Water with regards to sites at surface water flood risk.

PCS Reference Number: PCS/153714 Site reference information (to be supplied by planning authority) Previous SEPA Review of Flood Risk Technical Review of Flood Risk Planning staff to complete Summary of comments provided on 28 June 2010 under PCS/107980 FR Hydrology staff to compete Mitigation required to make the site acceptable on LDP1 Site LDP1 Site Name Settlement Easting Northing Proposed Land Use Number of units Size of Site (ha) Previous Planning Response Summary Further Notes/Observations Previous SEPA Increasing Site within Allocation Watercourse Potential Additional Information SEPA holds e.g. Formal flood Comparison of current comments and Flood risk detailed comments FR grounds. Ref (REP Policy Applications Comments - vulnerability (if Potentially potentially at catchment less development of historic record of flooding from any defences present previous advice on LDP1 NO) Number Further flood risk brownfield) Vulnerable medium to high than 3km2 hence allocation could source / post flood survey / Approved and current Only answer yes to 1 of option A or B information (e.g. Area risk of flooding not modelled in increase the Local Authority or SEPA Flood Studies standard of Detailed comments including aspects for OPTION A: OPTION B: ADVISORY ONLY: Has position on site If yes, why has our FRA) required? (within or adjacent Indicative Flood probability of protection consideration in site specific FRA e.g. Recommend Assessment of Surface Water changed since LDP 1? view of site to indicative 1 in Map flooding Structures complicate Flood Risk at site e.g. removal from flood risk Hazard - this changed? 200 flood outline) elsewhere bridges, culverts etc Please identify plan (detailed required column is to or at flood risk where appropriate FR relevant development report from FRH highlight to the from another requirements are attached in order that we required to PA the fact that a source can support these in our response justify this surface water request) hazard has been id tifi d t th We hold two records of flooding on site from the Penny Burn. Both are from A FRA will need to assertain the developable October 2004 (21st and 24th) and extent of the site / the risk posed by the Penny therefore almost certainly relate to the 13/00038/PPPM - Burn. It is unclear if this watercourse is Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood same event. Both descriptions state SEPA offered no Highlighted presence of minor partially culverted on site. Different OS IND5/RES2 envelope but has a minor watercourse with a Surface water – that: Open channel section between 1 West Byrehill Kilwinning 228660 642612 Residential 400 25.582 objection on the 14 watercourse on site - Penny Burn Yes Unknown No going through site Yes None background maps show different things. There No Yes Yes No N/A (9) catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or small part culverts completely submerged, February 2013 under through western end of site is a d/s culvert under the A78 that will also running through it. estimated depth of water is 1.5 to 2m. PCS/124680. need to be considered. In this instance the Area is still fenced off after last flood surface water extent is also showing the but shallow flooding outside fenced indicative extent of the Penny Burn. area including over footpath. No sign o flooding in Chivas Bros land.

A FRA will need to be undertaken to ascertain the developable extent of the site / the risk posed by the Rye Water. Most of the site is slightly set back from the Rye Water, however it looks to extend all the way down to the edge We hold a record of flooding at the As outlined in the of this watercourse immediately u/s of the Rye B780 Rye Bridge / footbridge upstream detail comments, Bridge. NAC commissioned the Garnock Site within, partially within or adjacent to the and pipe bridge from the Rye Water. the study our Flood Study in 2003 this is however now 14 Indicative 1 in 200 year flood envelope but The cause was risk of debris blockage / previous comments Drakemyre/Ryesid years old and would need to be updated in the 26 RES2(21) Dalry 229043 650276 Residential 45 1.593 N/A outwith the 1 in 200 year flood floodplain based Rye Water No Unknown No Fluvial - small part None Yes poor state of the banks. No date. This None No Yes No Yes were based on e event that it covered this site. Whilst the more on the 2003 River Garnock study commissioned record was supplied to us by the North requires to be recent Upper Garnock Flood Risk Modelling by North Ayrshire Council. Ayrshire Council Flood Prevention and updated and also Study (Halcrow 2012) included the Rye Water Land Drainage Team and came from hold records of this watercourse was only modelled as an the 2001 Biennial Flood Report. flooding in the area. inflow so we do not have a 1:200 year extent / design level for this reach of the Rye Water. Surface water is also shown on site this is matter for NAC to consider as the Flood Prevention Authority.

The site is fully within the functional flood plain at a location adjacent to the confluence of the River Irvine and River Garnock. This stretch of the river is also tidal influenced. Whilst we acknowledge that this is a previously developed site redevelopment to a residential use represents an increase in land use vulnerability. In line with Scottish Planning Policy, and our Land Use Vulnerability SEPA were not consulted Guidance on this site when asked to The site was entirely within the 1:200 (https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/143416/land- considered the promoted fluvial extent on the previous Indicative use-vulnerability-guidance.pdf), SEPA do not Site not on shapefile provided by NAC sites for the plan (response IND5/RES2 Flood Map. This remains the case in support this and therefore object to any Unknown Church Street Irvine 231392 638840 Residential 100 4.571 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes Yes Fluvial - all None Yes None Yes No No dated 28 June). As noted N/A (7) the new flood map. We note that it proposals to increase the vulnerability of the June 2010. however, this advice aligns appears that this was used as an site. Please note this aligns with our advice with our advice offered on industrial site previously. offered on site CFS77 considered at call for site CFS77 considered at sites stage (letter dated 01 December 2016 call for sites stage . under PCS/149398). We note that the site is also currently allocated as a mixed use employment area (Policy IND 5), if an alternative proposal is put forward to develop the site to a similar or less vulnerable use we would not object to this subject to sufficient information being provided to demonstrate tha the proposals would have a neutral effect on flood risk.

We hold a record of flooding for the Southannan Burn uphill of this site on 9/10/2000. It is thought that the eastings and northings for this record A FRA will need to be undertaken to ascertain 17/00584/PPM - are incorrect. We recommend that you the developable extent of the site / the risk SEPA offered no Site not on shapefile provided by NAC contact Flood Risk colleagues to posed by the burns that run through and No as it is not apparent that Surface water – Unknown RES3 Fairlie East Fairlie 221243 655329 Residential 115 7.755 objection on 18 July considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Unknown Yes going through site Yes ascertain the location of this event. It None adjacent to the site. There is also a pond on No Yes Yes we were consulted on this n/a small part 2017 under June 2010. was reported in the 2001 Biennial Flood site. In this instance the surface water extent site under LDP1. PCS/153906 Report The details we have state: is also acting a proxy for the fluvial extent of Fairlie - Exceptionally heavy rainfall, burns that run through and boarder the site. repeat of above, Council staff diverted flood waters back into burn using sandbags. No properties flooded.

We have considered a On the basis that the site is adjacent to the number of coastal functional floodplain we do not require Part of the site was consultations on this There are no a FRA to be submitted, we will merely require shown to be at site including the formal defences. a 600mm freeboard allowance to be added to coastal risk by the 130 (although overall overarching PPP We would consider care homes to be We hold a record of coastal flooding on However the site the 1:200 year extreme still water level for the old indicative flood RES2(13)/ site capacity 440 this (11/00685/PPPM) and Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in a sensitive use and should therefore this site from 1/10/1936. This is from is elevated area. Separate from our involvement NAC map. The new Flood 45 RES9/TOU Ardrossan Harbour Ardrossan 222833 642532 Residential relates to additional 22.978 subsequent detailed 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are Yes Yes Yes rface water – small p None No No No Yes Yes be protected against the 1 in 1000 the SNIFFER Coastal Project and outwith the might require a FRA to be submitted so that Map for Scotalnd 3(b) capacity beyond local applications (most may be medium to high risk of flooding. year flood. merely states: Flooding of coastal area. coastal functional they can assess the impact of waves and loca shows the site as plan before LDP1) recently floodplain by the bathymetry. We note that a care home was bieng adjacent to 15/00639/PPM which harbour wall. previously proposed. This is a most vulnerable the 200 year coastal we offered no use and would need to be elevated above the extent. objection to under 1:1000 year coastal event. PCS/143589). 14/00593/PPPM - SEPA requested further information Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not IND5/RES2 Surface water – No objection to the site being taken forward on 47 Lundholm Road Stevenston 227594 641044 Residential 70 7.861 regarding the comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Partially None No None None No No Yes apparent on this site at N/A (19) small part flood risk grounds. proposed SUDS June 2010. LDP1. strategy under PCS/136890. The new flood map for Scotland shows the site to be entirely outwith the medium likelihood fluvial extent / functional floodplain o the River Garnock. A significant part of this site was shown to be at risk of fluvial flooding It is thought that this site could be on the indicative flood map. And outputs from brownfield, in which case we would the 2003 Garnock Flood Study also show the not object. Most of this site is shown site to be at risk. (However, this study is now Despite the fact that to not be at risk of flooding in the 14 years old and is no longer considered to be the new Flood Map No - comments also align 2003 River Garnock study, apart the most accurate or up to date assessment of for Scotland shows with those offered on site Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in from the northeastern corner. If any risk). Whist the current flood map doesn’t the site as being CFS69 considered at call 16 RES2(10) Nethermains Kilwinning 230498 642450 Residential 100 4.408 N/A 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are of the site is undeveloped functional Yes Yes rface water – small p None No None None show the site to be at risk it is unclear how the No Yes Yes outwith the 200 year for sites stage (letter dated may be medium to high risk of flooding. floodplain then were would old railway embankment that runs along the fluvial extent we 01 December 2016 under recommend that the allocation outline front of the site was modelled. Old maps show have concerns that PCS/149398). is reviewed to avoid this. Please cuttings and crossings running through the the site could still be confirm the nature of the current embankment and these could act as flow at risk. landuse at the site. pathways. The elevation of parts of the site is the same as the park on the far bank that is shown to be within the medium likelihood fluvial extent. We therefore require a FRA to be undertaken to ascertain if these flow pathways still exist and if they do if the site is at risk.

Unknown as comment not apparent on this site at LDP1. Comments also align Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no IND5/RES2 Tournament Park - No objection to the site being taken forward on with those offered on site 98 Irvine 232199 641320 Residential 250 10.434 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes rface water – small p None No None None No No Yes N/A (1) Redburn East flood risk grounds. CFS59 considered at call June 2010. for sites stage (letter dated 01 December 2016 under PCS/149398). A stream / field drain is shown on the Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not far side of the road. It looks as if it No objection to the site being taken forward on 33 RES2(35) Cairnhouse Farm Blackwaterfoot 189858 628148 Residential 30 2.278 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown No No None No None No No No apparent on this site at N/A issues at this point and flows NW away flood risk grounds. June 2010. LDP1. from the site. Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that No objection to the site being taken forward on Unknown RES4(10) Montrose House Brodick 200977 636273 Residential 15 0.754 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No None No None None No No No we were consulted on this N/A flood risk grounds. June 2010. site under LDP1. Further topographical information or a FRA wi need to be submitted to ascertain the Site not on shapefile provided by NAC developable extent of the site / the risk posed No as it is not apparent that Unknown RES4(9) Brathwic Terrace Brodick 201914 635457 Residential 30 1.468 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No on boundary Yes None None by the field drain that runs along the edge to No Yes No we were consulted on this N/A June 2010. the site. Alternatively the site boundary can be site under LDP1. amended so that it is clearly set back from this watercourse. Further topographical information or a FRA wi need to be submitted to ascertain the Site not on shapefile provided by NAC developable extent of the site / the risk posed No as it is not apparent that Unknown RES4(13) Springbank Brodick 202060 635593 Residential 30 1.32 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No going through site Yes None None by the field drain that issues near the northern No Yes No we were consulted on this N/A June 2010. edge of the site. Alternatively the site boundary site under LDP1. can be amended so that it is clearly set back from this watercourse. Further topographical information or a FRA wi need to be submitted to ascertain the Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in Flood risk from minor watercourses developable extent of the site / the risk posed 5 RES4(11) Benlister South Lamlash 201978 630793 Residential 40 2.523 N/A 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are on the east and west boundaries Yes Yes No going through site Yes None None by the field drains that run through and along No Yes No No N/A may be medium to high risk of flooding. should also be considered. the edge to the site. Alternatively the site boundary can be amended so that it is clearly set back from these watercourses. Further topographical information or a FRA wi need to be submitted to ascertain the Site not on shapefile provided by NAC developable extent of the site / the risk posed No as it is not apparent that Unknown RES2(36) Benlister North Lamlash 202041 630926 Residential 30 0.697 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No on boundary Yes None None by the field drain that runs along the edge to No Yes No we were consulted on this N/A June 2010. the site. Alternatively the site boundary can be site under LDP1. amended so that it is clearly set back from this watercourse. Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not South of Golf No objection to the site being taken forward on 92 RES4(12) Whiting Bay 204269 625490 Residential 10 0.793 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No None No None None No No No apparent on this site at N/A Course Road flood risk grounds. June 2010. LDP1. Further topographical information or a FRA wi need to be submitted to ascertain the Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood developable extent of the site / the risk posed envelope but has a minor watercourse with a On northwestern and eastern 37 RES4(14) Ladeside Place Shiskine 191404 629963 Residential 8 0.618 N/A Yes No No on boundary Yes None None by the field drain that runs along the edge to No Yes No No N/A catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or boundaries the site. Alternatively the site boundary can be running through it. amended so that it is clearly set back from this watercourse. We were consulted on A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain an educational the developable extent of the site / the risk campus at this site posed by the small watercourse that runs (15/00642/PPM) and Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that along the edge to the site. Alternatively the site Unknown RES4(6) Alexander Avenue Largs 221193 660034 Residential 80 2.387 after initially raising considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes rface water – small p on boundary Yes None None No Yes No we were consulted on this N/A boundary can be amended so that it is clearly concerns withdrew an June 2010. site under LDP1. set back from this watercourse. In this case objection on 21 the surface water extent is a proxy for fluvial Junuary 2016 under extent. PCS/144756. We assume that the previous site Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood boundary extended Southannan envelope but has a minor watercourse with a No objection to the site being taken forward on 63 RES2(30) Fairlie 220919 653956 Residential 4 1.077 N/A On southern boundary Yes Yes rface water – small p None No None None No No Yes Yes up to the Walled Garden catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or flood risk grounds. watercourse on the running through it. far side of Southannan House Further topographical information or a FRA wi 16/00397/PPPM - need to be submitted to ascertain the SEPA offered no Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in Flood risk from two minor developable extent of the site / the risk posed objection subject to 22 RES4(7) Lawhill Farm West Kilbride 221240 647975 Residential 70 2.346 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are watercourses in the middle of the site Yes Yes rface water – small p on boundary Yes None None by the field drain that runs along the edge to No Yes Yes No N/A flood risk conditions may be medium to high risk of flooding. should also be considered. the site. Alternatively the site boundary can be on 18 May 2016 under amended so that it is clearly set back from this PCS/146672. watercourse. No objection to the site being taken forward. The minor watercourse that issues on the Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not Ardrossan High Surface water – other side of Ardrossan High Road sits below 21 RES2(29) West Kilbride 221027 647574 Residential 30 2.916 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes None No None None No No No apparent on this site at N/A Road adjacent to the site and the slope on the site always looks June 2010. LDP1. sufficient to direct flow down the road away from the site. Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not No objection to the site being taken forward on 43 RES2(28) Ardrossan Road West Kilbride 220558 646663 Residential 124 5.984 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes rface water – small p None No None None No No Yes apparent on this site at N/A flood risk grounds. June 2010. LDP1. A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain the developable extent of the site / the risk posed by the small watercourses that run Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood through the site. It is thought that a small Land East of Golf envelope but has a minor watercourse with a 53 RES2(31) 219956 667819 Residential 50 4.316 N/A Small watercourses issue within site Yes No rface water – small p going through site Yes None None watercourse might be partially culverted No Yes Yes No N/A Course Rd catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or through the site. This will need to be running through it. confirmed. In this case we believe that the surface water extent is a proxy for fluvial extent as well as showing surface flooding. Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood Site is adjacent to Lower Reservoir A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain Skelmorlie Golf envelope but has a minor watercourse with a and minor watercourse. It should also the developable extent of the site / the risk 96 RES2(32) Skelmorlie 219927 667480 Residential 50 2.014 N/A Yes No rface water – adjacengoing through site no None None No Yes No Yes n/a Club catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or be noted that the site is downslope of posed by the small watercourses that run running through it. Upper Reservoir. through and issue on the site. We have considered a number of consultations on wider site including the overarching PPP (11/00685/PPPM) and Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not RES2(18)/ Montgomerie No objection to the site being taken forward on 69 Ardrossan 222996 642581 Residential 15 0.59 subsequent detailed comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes Yes rface water – adjacen None No None None No No No apparent on this site at n/a RES9 Street flood risk grounds. applications (most June 2010. LDP1. recently 15/00639/PPM which we offered no objection to under PCS/143589). A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain the developable extent of the site / the risk No - comments also align posed by the small watercourses that run Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood with those offered on site Along northeastern boundary and through the site. It is thought that a small envelope but has a minor watercourse with a CFS24 considered at call 46 RES2(17) West of Sharphill Saltcoats 224680 643449 Residential 200 17.995 N/A then through site to southwestern Yes Yes rface water – small p going through site Yes None None watercourse might be partially culverted No Yes Yes N/A catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or for sites stage (letter dated corner through the site. This will need to be running through it. 01 December 2016 under confirmed. In this case we believe that the PCS/149398). surface water extent is a proxy for fluvial extent as well as showing surface flooding. Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not IND5/RES2 Sharphill Industrial No objection to the site being taken forward on 77 Saltcoats 225289 643360 Residential 50 2.754 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes rface water – small p None No None None No No Yes apparent on this site at N/A (16) Estate flood risk grounds. June 2010. LDP1. We hold an old record of flooding on the Stevenson Burn. This is dated 16/6/1897 is from the Scotsman A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain archive. The record states: Heavy rain the developable extent of the site / the risk caused greatest flood on burn on many posed by the Stevenson Water and the Site adjacent to the Indicative 1 in 200 year years. Rose 3.0-3.5m above usual Quarrel Burn. In this case we believe that the 73 RES2(15) Kerelaw Glen Stevenston 226636 642411 Residential 30 2.868 N/A flood envelope and subsequently are may be N/A Yes Yes Fluvial - small part on boundary Yes level. TheBridge on Fallerton Road in None No Yes Yes No N/A surface water extent is a proxy for fluvial medium to high risk of flooding. Steventon carried away as waster built extent of the Quarrel Burn as well as showing up in river walls and one of walls fell surface flooding at the southern end of the flooding Boglemart almost all way and site. New str (sic). The Quarrel Burn runs through a culvert d/d of the site and the Stevenson Burn under the A738.

We hold an old record of flooding on the Stevenson Burn. This is dated A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain 16/6/1897 is from the Scotsman The site is mostly outwith the the developable extent of the site / the risk No - comments also align archive. The record states: Heavy rain Indicative 1 in 200 year flood posed by the Stevenson Water. We note that with those offered on site Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in caused greatest flood on burn on many Former Kerelaw envelope and it is thought that any there is a small section of field drain on site CFS14 considered at call 86 RES2(14) Stevenston 226754 642856 Residential 80 14.413 N/A 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are Yes Yes Fluvial - small part going through site Yes years. Rose 3.0-3.5m above usual None No Yes Yes N/A School proposed development could likely and a well. Parts of the site also also shown to for sites stage (letter dated may be medium to high risk of flooding. level. TheBridge on Fallerton Road in avoid the undeveloped functional be at risk of surface water flooding. This is an 01 December 2016 under Steventon carried away as waster built floodplain; this should be confirmed. issue for NAC to consider as the Flood PCS/149398). up in river walls and one of walls fell Prevention Authority. flooding Boglemart almost all way and New str (sic). There is well on site.

The site is adjacent to the medium probaility Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no fluvial extent of the Garnock. However there Unknown as comment not 8 RES2(11) Longford Avenue Kilwinning 230183 642336 Residential 150 5.874 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes rface water – small p None No None None looks to be a significant difference in level No No Yes apparent on this site at N/A June 2010. between the edge of the site and the fluvial LDP1. extent.

Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not No objection to the site being taken forward on 70 RES4(5) Hazeldene Kilwinning 231091 643750 Residential 10 0.432 N/A comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes Surface water – part None No None None No No Yes apparent on this site at N/A flood risk grounds. June 2010. LDP1. We are satified that the NW corner of Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that Land at the site sits sufficently back from and No objection to the site being taken forward on Unknown RES2(12) Kilwinning 230915 643993 Residential 50 2.459 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No None No None No No No we were consulted on this N/A Mossculloch Farm above the Threadhill Burn that this flood risk grounds. June 2010. site under LDP1. watercourse does not pose a risk. Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that No objection to the site being taken forward on Unknown RES4(1) Corsehillhead Kilwinning 231366 643173 Residential 40 2.081 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes No None No None None No No No we were consulted on this N/A flood risk grounds. June 2010. site under LDP1. We removed our objection to PPiP being granted for this site (see response dated 04 15/00103/PPPM - May 15). We require a more detailed FRA to After raising initial be submitted when detailed planning Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood flooding concerns we permisison is sought. This will need to Land at Blairland envelope but has a minor watercourse with a 66 RES2(20) Dalry 229919 648705 Residential 200 22.819 removed an objection Yes No rface water – small p going through site Yes None None ascertain the developable extent of the site / No Yes Yes No N/A Farm catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or subject to a condition the risk posed by the small watercourses that running through it. on 04 May 2015 under run through the site. In this case we believe PCS/139827 that the surface water extent is a proxy for Relatively short length of watercourse fluvial extent as well as showing surface southeast of Blairland Farm buildings flooding. Whilst the redevelopment of this site would constitute a reduction in vulnerability a FRA will need to be submitted to ensure that new We hold a record of floodiing at theedeg development does not extend into the Site not on shapefile provided by NAC of the site at the footbridge at Safeway functional floodplain of the Pundeavon Burn as No as it is not apparent that Unknown RES2(23) Garnock Academy Kilbirnie 231333 654861 Residential 200 7.296 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown No Yes Fluvial - small part None Yes and Milton Road (no date) Description: None this would potentially increase flood risk on No Yes Yes we were consulted on this N/A June 2010. Flooding impact not identified listed as site and to neighbouring properties. The Arts site under LDP1. requiring maintenance by NAC. Resource centre on site looks as if it is at medium to high risk of fluvial flooding. Parts of the site are also shown to be at surface water risk. 15/00778/PPM - Yes, but same as response SEPA offered no Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood to planning application We assume that the Land at West objection to this envelope but has a minor watercourse with a No objection to the site being taken forward on 85 RES2(22) Kilbirnie 231068 654697 Residential 200 8.909 On northern boundary Yes Yes rface water – small p None No None None No No Yes 15/00778/PPM (see previous site Bankside Farm development on 12 catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or flood risk grounds. response dated 12 January boundary differed. January 2016 under running through it. 2016). PCS/144363. 13/00501/PPPM - No objection to the site being taken forward. After initially raising Whilst the site is in proximity to the medium concerns with the Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not likelihood fluvial extent it is located sufficiently 67 RES2(25) Beith Road 232961 652661 Residential 60 3.128 drainage proposals we comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown No rface water – adjacen None No None None No No No apparent on this site at N/A above and back from the Powgree Burn that were able to remove June 2010. LDP1. we are satisfied that it is not to medium to high our objection under risk of flooding. PCS/128863. Further topographical information or a FRA wi need to be submitted to ascertain the Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood developable extent of the site / the risk posed Land to West of envelope but has a minor watercourse with a Surface water – 2 RES2(26) Beith 234674 654828 Residential 150 8.714 N/A Through middle of site Yes No going through site Yes None None by the field drain that runs through the middle No Yes Yes No N/A Auldlea Road catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or small part of the site. Alternatively the site boundary can running through it. be amended so that it is clearly set back from this watercourse. Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that John Galt Primary Surface water – No objection to the site being taken forward on Unknown RES4(2) Irvine 232594 639703 Residential 80 2.462 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown No Yes None No None None No No Yes we were consulted on this N/A School small part flood risk grounds. June 2010. site under LDP1. We assume that the previous site boundary differed significantly. The old 13/00408/PPPM - It is unclear what the suggested use Indicative flood map SEPA offered no for this site is - it may be appropriate showed much more Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in objection to this for an area at flood risk. Please Surface water – No objection to the site being taken forward on fluvial inundation in 80 RES2(5) Gailes Irvine 232634 636742 Residential 30 2.13 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are Yes Yes None No None None No No Yes Yes development on 29 confirm that there will be no small part flood risk grounds. this area than the may be medium to high risk of flooding. July 2013 under development in the undeveloped current medium PCS/127858. functional floodplain. likelihood extent does. The current site boundary is still outwith the old fluvial extent. Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that Fencedyke No objection to the site being taken forward on Unknown RES4(3) Irvine 234054 639328 Residential 80 1.136 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown No Yes rface water – small p None No None None No No Yes we were consulted on this N/A Primary School flood risk grounds. June 2010. site under LDP1. Site not on shapefile provided by NAC No as it is not apparent that No objection to the site being taken forward on Unknown RES2(4) House Irvine 235405 640579 Residential 40 5.88 N/A considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown No Yes rface water – small p None No a pond on site. There are no other wate None No No Yes we were consulted on this N/A flood risk grounds. June 2010. site under LDP1. We hold an old record of flooding for this site from the Annick Water. It is dated March 1907 and is from the 13/00667/PPM - Scotsman Archive. Description: Yes, but same as response SEPA offered no Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood We assume that the Regional level. River overflowed banks to planning application objection to this envelope but has a minor watercourse with a No objection to the site being taken forward on previous site 48 RES2(3) Middleton Road Irvine 235652 640951 Residential 100 11.78 Through middle of site Yes Yes Fluvial - small part going through site Yes at various points, submerging hundreds None No No Yes 13/00667/PPM (see development on 10 catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or flood risk grounds. boundary differed of acres and houses in and response dated 12 December 2013 under running through it. slightly. Pereceton (near Irvine) heavy December 2013). PCS/130359 . rain/storm. much land flooded. No mention of damage. many houses flooded. A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain the developable extent of the site / the risk Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in We have record of an FRA at this site A 2008 FRA at this site by posed by the Capringstone Burn. A FRA was 71 RES2(8) Springside Farm Springside 236774 638952 Residential 170 7.934 N/A 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are which highlighted increased risk from Yes Most of it Fluvial - part None Yes EnviroCentre highlighted increased risk None No Yes Yes No N/A undertaken by EnviroCentre in 2008 for this may be medium to high risk of flooding. an under capacity culvert. from an under capacity culvert. site. This study could be updated, if available, or a new study could be undertaken.

Royal Haskoning submitted a FRA for No as it is not apparent that 09/00690/PPPM - There are no The current SEPA flood Map indicates that this site in 2009. We accepted the we were consulted on this SEPA offered no formal defences. part of the site is at fluvial risk. We therefore outputs from this study, the site under LDP1. Please objection to this However the site require the work done by Royal Haskoning to Site not on shapefile provided by NAC assessment that the estuary was tidally note our comments also submission as long as is elevated be updated to ensure that the fluvial risk to the Unknown RES2(6) Irvine Harbourside Irvine 230642 638099 Residential 340 5.79 considered under SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes Yes Fluvial - part None Yes dominated and we stated that we had No Yes Yes align with those offered on N/A conditions covering outwith the site hasn’t changed significantly in the interim. June 2010. no objection to planning application site CFS81 considered at flood risk were coastal functional Whilst this is unlikely the Royal Haskoning 09/00690/PPM subject to two planning call for sites stage (letter attached under floodplain by the FRA references back to 1998 report conditions being attached (see dated 01 December 2016 PCS/103987. harbour wall. undertaken by Halcrow Crouch. PCS/103987 dated 29 Oct 2009). under PCS/149398). This site is shown to be outwith the On the basis that the site is shown to be New flood map and Yes, slight change is Site within, partially within or adjacent to the 1:200 year fluvial extent of the Garnock outwith the medium likelihood fluvial extent on a separate study position - as part of the site Indicative 1 in 200 year flood envelope but as established by the 2012 Halcrow the SEPA flood map and that this is supported both show the site was shown to be at risk 50 RES2(24) Garnock View Kilbirnie 231979 653489 Residential 100 5.988 N/A outwith the 1 in 200 year flood floodplain based River Garnock Yes Yes Fluvial - adjacent to None No River Garnock Flood Risk Management None by outputs from the 2012 Halcrow Study we No No Yes to be adjacent to / previously. It is possible that on the 2003 River Garnock study commissioned Study. Old maps show a railway line are satisfied that the site is not at medium to outwith the medium site boundary has slightly by North Ayrshire Council. and embankment separating the site high risk of flooding (as per the SPP Risk likelihood fluvial changed. from the Garnock. Framework). extent. 17/00581/PPM - SEPA offered no Site on shapefile provided by NAC but no Unknown as comment not IND5/RES2 objection to this No objection to the site being taken forward on 93 North Newmoor Irvine 233543 639553 Residential 300 14.916 comment apparent by SEPA response dated 28 N/A Unknown Yes Yes rface water – small p NOne No None None No No Yes apparent on this site at N/A (2) planning application flood risk grounds. June 2010. LDP1. on 20 June 2017 under PCS/153419. A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain the developable extent of the site / the risk The suggested site encompasses We hold a record of flooding at the site. posed by Kilbirnie Loch and the small Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in Kilbirnie Loch and it is recommended It is dated 11/12/1994 and was supplied RES2(27)/ watercourse that runs through the site and 14 Lochshore Kilbirnie 232264 654318 Residential 250 70.573 N/A 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are that any proposed development avoid Yes Partially Fluvial - small part going through site Yes to us by Strathclyde Polict Comments: None No Yes Yes No N/A RES9 along the site boundary / the route of the old may be medium to high risk of flooding. the undeveloped functional floodplain Kilbirnie to Lochwinnoch road closed at railway line. Some of the surface water extent surrounding the Loch. Kilbirnie (A760). that is shown on site is a proxy for fluvial flooding. A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain No - comments also align the developable extent of the site / the risk with those offered on site Site within (or partially within) the Indicative 1 in Flood risk from a minor watercourse posed by the Noddsdale Water and the small Noddsdale CFS74 considered at call 10 RES2(34) Largs 220774 661172 Residential 80 11.554 N/A 200 year flood envelope and subsequently are in the middle of the should also be Yes Yes Fluvial - part going through site Yes None None watercourses that run through the site. In this No Yes Yes N/A Meadow Phase 2 for sites stage (letter dated may be medium to high risk of flooding. considered. case we believe that the surface water extent 01 December 2016 under could be a proxy for fluvial extent. The FRA PCS/149398). will determine if this is the case.

A FRA will need to be submitted to ascertain Site outwith the Indicative 1 in 200 year flood the developable extent of the site / the risk Brisbane Glen envelope but has a minor watercourses with a Surface water – posed by the small watercourse that run 9 RES2(33) Largs 221139 661000 Residential 60 4.951 N/A On southern boundary of site Yes Yes going through site Yes None None No Yes No No N/A Road catchment are of less than 3km2 adjacent to or small part through the site and the one that borders the running through it. site. In this case we believe that the surface water extent is a proxy for fluvial extent.

1.3 However, in line with the vulnerability guidance, and our Planning Background Paper on Flood Risk, we would have no objection in principle to the site being redeveloped for another least vulnerable use (i.e. general industry, offices, shops restaurants, cafes, financial, professional and other services etc.). Should this be proposed it would be necessary to demonstrate that this will not result in an increase in flood risk, either on or off site, relative to the previous development on site. Mitigation measures such as flood resilient design will also need to be incorporated into any proposal and the developer will need to accept the commercial risk and temporary disruption that may be caused during a flood event.

1.4 Please note that land raising is unlikely to be a viable in this instance as the primary flooding mechanism is fluvial and compensatory storage would therefore need to be provided.

1.5 As noted above we would object to any proposed redevelopment that was to, or included, any highly or most vulnerable uses as this would constitute an increase in vulnerability. Any development that included overnight accommodation would not meet our requirements for flood free egress. As such, we would not support the promotion flats above a commercial unit for example.

If you have any queries relating to this letter, please contact me by telephone on 01698 839 000 or by e-mail to [email protected].

Yours sincerely

Senior Planning Officer Planning Service

ECopy to: @north-ayrshire.gov.uk

Disclaimer This advice is given without prejudice to any decision made on elements of the proposal regulated by us, as such a decision may take into account factors not considered at this time. We prefer all the technical information required for any SEPA consents to be submitted at the same time as the planning or similar application. However, we consider it to be at the applicant's commercial risk if any significant changes required during the regulatory stage necessitate a further planning application or similar application and/or neighbour notification or advertising. We have relied on the accuracy and completeness of the information supplied to us in providing the above advice and can take no responsibility for incorrect data or interpretation, or omissions, in such information. If we have not referred to a particular issue in our response, it should not be assumed that there is no impact associated with that issue. For planning applications, if you did not specifically request advice on flood risk, then advice will not have been provided on this issue. Further information on our consultation arrangements generally can be found on our website planning pages.

Page 1 of 3

RE: North Ayrshire Local Development Plan (LDP2): Agency Engagement [OFFICIAL] Planning SW to: 'LDP' 19/07/2017 10:07 Hide Details From: Planning SW To: 'LDP' Morning

Thank you for sharing the outcome of the site assessment with us. SEPA raised no concerns with the three sites considered to be marketable and deliverable (CFS07, CFS15 and CFS51) (letter dated 01 December 2016 under PCS/149398) and therefore have no further comment to add on these at this stage.

If the status of the ‘amber’ sites (concerns about their marketability and deliverability) changes we would welcome, as proposed below, being recontacted. It is apparent we didn’t have the opportunity to comment on some of these previously and assume they have been added later (e.g. CFS84, 85, 86 and 89). We also note that of those we did look at flood risk was identified as a potential constraint for 16.

Given our previous advice, we welcome that it is not intended to pursue sites CFS22 and CFS82.

Please just let us know if you need anything else on these. For info, our review of the existing sites will be with you by 31 July.

Kind regards,

Planning Service, Angus Smith Building, 6 Parklands Ave, Eurocentral, Holytown ML1 4WQ

sepa.org.uk web:www.sepa.org.uk The information contained in this email is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the named addressee. Access, copying or re-use of the information in it by any other is not authorised. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately by return email to [email protected].

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 07 July 2017 15:20 Subject: North Ayrshire Local Development Plan (LDP2): Agency Engagement [OFFICIAL]

This email includes secure access to files: Access Secured Files Here - Expires Sunday 6 Aug 2017 10:59 PM (UTC) * If the link above does not work, copy the following URL to a web browser: https://north- ayrshire.thruinc.net/Desktop/Distro/Open/0115JACF9NJ

Dear all,

Further to my email below, this email contains details of the site selection process for LDP2. We have built on the proforma that indicated how constraints had been assessed against each site in the Environmental Report that supported the Main Issues Report in January and I attach it for your comment.

Our initial SEA and infrastructure assessment is replicated in the updated proforma but the original is also available here: https://www.north- ayrshire.gov.uk/Documents/CorporateServices/LegalProtective/LocalDevelopmentPlan/ldp2/ldp2-interim- enviro-rpt.pdf

file:/// 06/09/2017 Page 2 of 3

The Main Issues Report indicated that we would proceed with our site assessments, guided strongly by marketability and viability of development proposals, and, accordingly, sites has been categorised on that basis. The categorisation system now shows sites in 4 categories, as follows: -

1. GREEN: The site is in a marketable location identified as being attractive to prospective developers and the proponent is known to have the capability to develop the site and deliver housing units within the plan period. 2. AMBER: We have concerns about: the location, because the wider area is not considered marketable, and/or the developer, because they do not have a track record or known capacity in North Ayrshire; or we have concerns about: the location, because the wider area is not considered marketable, and/or the delivery, because of the lack of established developer interest. 3. RED: The site is not within a location identified as being marketable and no evidence has been submitted to suggest that the proposal is being promoted by a party that is capable of developing the site within the plan period. 4. BLUE: The site generally does not fit with the above methodology and requires a unique assessment or other outcome.

For sites falling within categories 1-3 our approach is that at this stage, sites classified as '1' are deemed to be in a marketable location and are being promoted by a builder with a track record of delivering units. We are, therefore, looking to explore in further detail what work is needed to confirm that the site should be promoted in the Proposed LDP. Sites classified as '3' are in non-marketable locations and are not promoted by a party that has demonstrated capacity to develop the site. We are therefore unlikely to support those sites in the Proposed LDP. It is expected that the majority of sites classified as '2' will not be promoted in the Proposed LDP - however there may be scope for those sites to be included, particularly if, through further investigation, we reach a conclusion that there is a builder attached to the proposal that we have confidence in being able to deliver units on site.

In responding to sites, therefore, we would particularly welcome detailed comments on those sites classified as '1'. These will form crucial part of exploring whether the sites are fit for allocation, and the actions required to inform an action programme relating to those sites.

For '2' sites, we are only likely to take those sites forward if our view changes on the deliverability of the site, and we will be contacting site owners to establish if any further evidence exists on this matter. We will contact you if any circumstances change in this respect. In the meantime, to assist with responses, we only require comments where there is additional detail in relation to any site, or a fundamental concern with a potential allocation. We have a record of any of your previous comments on those sites.

It is unlikely that sites categorised as '3' will be taken forward, irrespective of whether constraints affect the site or not, so there is no need to submit further comments on those sites; particularly if you submitted comments at an earlier stage of the process.

For sites classified as '4', there are a number of reasons these sites may not fit typical methodology, for reasons, including the following:

 For sites with a deemed capacity of under 4 units, we do not intend to include those sites as housing allocations. However, we may explore how settlement boundaries or edge of settlement/rural policies can accommodate small scale development - and some of these sites may fall within those criteria. Please note that in this event, the acceptability of those sites will be a development management matter. There is no need to comment on those sites; unless there is a fundamental opposition to a particular site.  Some category '4' sites are existing LDP allocations. We are not seeking to de-allocate LDP1 allocations, so comments are only required where there is a fundamental change in position relating to the site.  Some sites are seeking the extension of allocated LDP1 sites, but where no development has taken place. We do not intend to proceed with the extended sites to allocation, and therefore no comments are required.  Some sites are non-residential. General comments are welcome for those sites.  The Ardeer peninsula is classified as such because part of the submission was previously allocated. This is a project being explored through the Ayrshire Growth Deal. Previous comments and concerns are noted for this site. Any additional comments are welcome, particularly where further detail and new information can be provided. Given the status of the Ayrshire Growth Deal work, it is not currently known whether/how this project should feature in the LDP, so comments are welcome, to assist future consideration of the site.

file:/ 06/09/2017 Page 3 of 3

In terms of cumulative capacity of development, sites falling within category '1' are estimated to be able to provide between 573 -715 units. Please note that as per the content of the Main Issues Report, we envisage this will not result in a substantial net increase in our total housing land supply, because we are looking to re- allocate some non-effective housing sites from the supply, to balance the volume of units added.

I recognise that some agencies will not need to comment on sites specifically. If this is the case, there is no requirement to respond. For anyone wishing to submit comments, I would be grateful for your response by 31 July 2017. For those agencies that have so far arranged meetings, I envisage that this will be a useful basis for discussion at our meeting.

In addition to this information, it is our intention to issue you with an initial draft of LDP policies for comment. This is currently being finalised and I hope to forward it to you for comment soon.

In terms of the content of the information on sites, the Council has not publicised the output from initial site assessments at this stage, and the eventual outcome that is represented in the Proposed LDP will reflect further discussions with agencies, sites proponents and public. Your comments will help inform future stages of this process. On this basis, I would be grateful if you could treat the site information as sensitive, and do not distribute this information. Should you require further information, or to meet site proponents, please advise me, and we can facilitate any such request.

Hope this is sufficient for your purposes. For any questions on any of the above, please contact me as below.

Kind regards,

Economy & Communities North Ayrshire Council Cunninghame House, Irvine, KA12 8EE

Other message recipients: From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Cc: Reply To All

Thru Tracking: T478-011-71329-84388 www.thruinc.com

file:/// 06/09/2017

Local Development Plan Flood Risk Hydrology (FRH) Guidance Notes and Caveats

As outlined in SEPA’s Interim Position Statement on Planning and Flooding – July 2009, we will work with planning authorities to ensure that development plans afford due weight to flood risk and thereby:

• promote flood risk avoidance in the first instance; • include development proposals that are both free from significant flood risk from any source and do not materially increase the probability of flooding elsewhere; • ensure that such proposals are robust in relation to climate change predictions; and, • detail how unavoidable impacts will be mitigated and delivered.

We have recently reprioritised our Planning Service to ensure that we are well placed to engage early in the plan preparation process. Our role will be to provide clear and consistent advice to planning authorities on flood risk within their area, based on the information we hold and information they provide to us. If we are to be in a position to accept in principle the development proposals contained in adopted plans, we need to be satisfied that planning authorities have afforded due weight to flood risk throughout the plan preparation. If due weight has been given to flood risk throughout the plan preparation then once a new style development plan is adopted, we will not revisit the principle of development, but may comment on the detail of the proposed execution. However, we do reserve the right to change our position if new or additional information on flooding becomes available that could materially affect the principle of development.

If no information is available on the classification of Greenfield/Brownfield, it has been assumed. Any advice provided is based on these assumptions. If the Local Authority has additional information, we would be happy to provide additional advice.

In terms of sustainable flood management, the starting point for development plans should be avoidance of flood risk as this represents the most sustainable solution. For information, we would object in principle to any new development significantly within undeveloped/sparsely developed 1 in 200 year flood plain (i.e. Greenfield), in accordance with Scottish Planning Policy.

Where there has been insufficient information provided with the consultation for us to assess flood risk from fluvial and coastal sources to allocated sites or change to a more vulnerable use, we will object. We would normally recommend at scoping stage that a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) was carried out to inform the planning process. A SFRA is the collation of all existing flood risk information to enable a comprehensive understanding of the flood risk in the area and to identify areas which are free from the risk of flooding and therefore suitable for future development. At strategic level, part of the SFRA could also be the identification of priority areas for more detailed analysis in the future.

As an alternative to an SFRA, to establish the principle of development for these sites, we would recommend that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) or other appropriate information is submitted in support of the suggested allocations.

Other appropriate information may be provided in a basic FRA and could include information on;

• a masterplan layout of the development site, • pre and post development site levels with finished floor levels related to nearby watercourses, • appropriate photographs and/or • any nearby historical flood levels.

However if this information is insufficient to provide a robust assessment of the risk of flooding then a strategic or detailed flood risk assessment may need to be carried out by a suitably qualified professional.

Please note that flood risk from watercourses smaller than those found on the Ordnance Survey 1:25 000 maps have not been considered and that there may be risk from watercourses shown on the 1:10 000 maps and from watercourses which are not shown on the Ordnance Survey maps and we would recommend that the Council consult their internal Flood Prevention Officer who may have further information on local flooding issues.

In December 2011, SEPA published the National Flood Risk Assessment (NFRA) required by the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009. The NFRA identifies areas that are potentially vulnerable to flood risk (Potentially Vulnerable Areas or PVAs). This information does not imply that all sites within a PVA are subject to flood risk.

The NFRA datasets will in future help to support Flood Risk Management Planning by 2015. Development Plans will require to have regard to Flood Risk Management Plans.

We have considered the strategic information in the FRMA with respect to PVA locations within the development plan area and would advise that the location of this Development Plan is within PVA(s) 11. The key information available in the FRMA for these PVAs includes:

• Summary of main impacts (for each PVA) Main sources of flood risk (for each PVA) • Number of existing properties currently at risk (for each PVA)

Any locations within a Development Plan outwith a PVA, should not be assumed to be free from flood risk. SEPA has produced the NFRA as the first stage of the Flood Risk Management Planning process. This sub-catchment area is not included as a PVA because it is below the threshold of significance of the NFRA/PVA method.

SCOTTISH ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AGENCY Caveat 1: The comments contained in this spreadsheet are based on information held by us in our GIS system and internal databases. The information has not been Identifier: LUPS‐DP‐SS ground truthed. If you are concerned about any of the comments or identify potential errors please contact us. Land Use Planning System SEPA Development Plan Spreadsheet Caveat 2: The sites have been assessed against the SEPA Flood Maps (published in January 2014). The Flood Maps have been produced following a consistent, nationally-applied methodology for catchment areas equal to or greater than 3km2 using a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) to define river corridors and low-lying coastal Issue No: Version 3 land. The maps are indicative and designed to be used as a strategic tool to assess, flood risk at the community level and to support planning policy and flood risk Issue date: 04/08/2015 management in Scotland. Guidance on SEPA engagement with the development plan process Caveat 3: Planning authorities should make contact with colleagues in the Roads Department and Scottish Water with regards to sites at surface water flood risk.

PCS Reference Number: PCS/154529 Call for Sites - Post MIR

Technical Review of Flood Risk

FR Hydrology staff to compete

Site Reference Settlement Site Name Easting Northing Number of Site Size Proposed Preferred site? Planning Developed, Increasing Site within Allocation potentially Watercourse Potential Additional Formal flood Is there a water units Land Use Permission status Undeveloped or vulnerability (if Potentially at medium to high catchment less than development of Information SEPA defences present Mitigation required to make the site acceptable on body within, If answer yes to any of the 4 questions below please provid Sparsley brownfield) Vulnerable Area risk of flooding 3km2 hence not allocation could holds e.g. historic and current Flood risk detailed comments FR grounds. forming part of the required or improvement measures in the Detailed Comm developed area (within or adjacent to modelled in increase the record of flooding standard of Only answer yes to 1 of option A or B site boundary, or (Needs to be indicative 1 in 200 Indicative Flood Map probability of from any source / protection immediately determined by flood outline) or at flooding elsewhere post flood survey / Detailed comments including aspects for OPTION A: OPTION B: ADVISORY ONLY: adjacent to the site? Would waste water drainage from the site either What are the Local Authority) flood risk from Approved Local consideration in site specific FRA e.g. Recommend Assessment of Surface Water exacerbate an existing point source sewage current pressures another source Authority or SEPA Structures complicate Flood Risk at site removal from plan flood risk required Hazard - this column If yes, go on to pressure or create a new pressure in relation to on the water Flood Studies e.g. bridges, culverts etc Please (detailed report is to highlight to the complete remaining the options below? body that could identify where appropriate FR relevant from FRH required PA the fact that a water environment be exacerbated development requirements are attached in to justify this surface water columns. Sewerage Sewerage Private or addressed by order that we can support these in our request) hazard has been treatment network drainage issue theproposed response identified at the site. If no, go to straight works capacity capacity issues allocation? We will recommend to co-location issues in the planning columns. response that the PA take the issue forward through discussion with their flood prevention and roads department colleagues and Scottish Water, where relevant

Old Toll House, CFS07A Irvine Lochlibo Road 234403 641317 43 Residential Unknown No No None No None No No flood risk apparent. No No No No (additional area) Craft Studios with living CFS83 Brodick Alma Road 201552 635969 Unknown Yes, 12/08 No None No None No No flood risk apparent. No No No No accomodatio n above Residential development Manor (75 CFS84 Beith 238422 650458 75 Unknown No No None No None No No flood risk apparent. No No No Yes Yes Point source Farm, Burnhouse units)/Farm shop/Tearoo m A minor watercourse with potentially culverted sections flows along the site boundary which could represent a potential flood risk. A basic FRA, consisting of topographic information in Surface water – the first instance and a detailed layout immediately CFS85 Stevenston Kerelaw Mains Farm 226522 642621 180 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/03 going through site Yes None No No Yes Yes No No No small part plan will be required. A surface water adjacent flood hazard has been identified and should be discussed with FPA and Scottish Water. Appropriate surface water management measures should be adopted. We hold a record of flooding from the Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 Springside Nursery, Kilbride Burn in year floodplain. No development should CFS86 West Kilbride Lawoodhead, Dalry 221154 649117 11 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/03 Fluvial - small part None Yes proximity of the site No take place within this area. A No Yes No Yes No No Yes Point source Rd on November watercourse is also adjacent to the site. 2003, leading to Flood Risk Assessment required. localised flooding. A minor watercourse flows adjacent the site which could represent a potential flood risk. A basic FRA, consisting of CFS87 Lamash Altachorvie 203638 632155 10 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/08 No adjacent to site Yes None No No Yes No Yes No No Yes Point source topographic information in the first instance and a detailed layout plan will be required. East of Golf Course CFS88 Whiting Bay 204259 625691 25 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/08 No None No None No No flood risk apparent. No No No No Rd Fluvial - adjacent to 1 in 200 flood CFS89 Kilwinning Longford Avenue 230224 642246 50 Residential Unknown No Fluvial - adjacent to None Yes None No outline. Flood Risk Assessment No Yes No No required. Multiple minor watercourses flow multiple through or along the site boundary Site adjacent to CFS90 Brodick 202154 638338 Residential Unknown No No watercourses Yes None No which could represent a potential flood No Yes No Yes No No Yes Point source Merkland Bridge through site risk. A basic Flood Risk Assessment is required in the first instance. Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. No development should Glen multiple take place within this area. Multiple multiple CFS91 Brodick Cloy/Auchrannie 200584 635687 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/08 Fluvial - small part watercourses Yes None No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No minor watercourses also flow through pressures Road through site the site. Flood Risk Assessment required. Part of this site lies within the 1 in 200 year floodplain. No development should Site to the south of take place within this area. Multiple CFS92 Brodick 201996 635215 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/08 Fluvial - small part adjacent to site Yes None No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Point source Brathwic Terrace minor watercourses also flow through the site. Flood Risk Assessment required. We hold a record Multiple minor watercourses flow of river flooding in through or along the site boundary Site to the west of proximity of the site CFS93 Lamash 202042 630931 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/08 No going through site Yes No which could represent a potential flood No Yes No Yes No No No None Benlister Terrace in August 2004 risk. A basic Flood Risk Assessment is causing localised required in the first instance. flooding. Fluvial - adjacent to 1 in 200 flood Ross Road near CFS94 Lamash 201414 629855 Residential Unknown Yes, 12/08 Fluvial - adjacent to None Yes None No outline. Flood Risk Assessment No Yes No No Dyemill required. Site Reivew: Co-location

Local Operations staff to complete Planning staff to complete Local Opertions staff to complete Planning staff to complete

Mitgation required to make the site acceptable and avoid de details of pressure(s) and mitigation ONLY COMPLETE BOXES BELOW IF YES TO ANY OF Co-location position and required mitigation Detailed comments on Water Environment adverse effects on the water environment Co-location issues ments on Water Environment column THE LAST 4 GREEN BOXES Only anwser yes to 1 box (Only answer yes to B or C if the answer to A is no)

Are there any formal Are there any This column should be used to A. Recommend removal of site B. Location acceptable C. Allocation Is the site Detailed comments on co-location Highlight to local authority Recommend removal of improvement further opportunities Name of water Baseline or Water body ID Water body 1.provide an overview of issues where you consider that an as it is likely to lead to the subject to certain acceptable but adjacent or issues with SEPA regulated sites that site is in vicinity of a site due to co-location measures set against for improvement we body Non-baseline? status allocation could not be implemented without a deterioration deterioration in the status of a requirements (defined encourage further within the vicnity licensed site which may with regulated process/ the water body set should be in the status of the water body or development would result water body or prevent a water in detailed comments on improvement of a SEPA result in a loss of amenity activity which is likely to thorugh the river basin encouraging (eg in a failure to put in place the necessary improvements set body achieving the water environment opportunities over regulated site? and residual nuisance cause nuisance even planning process that morphological improvements set against it column) that will prevent and above those OR fora licensed site which with regulatory controls against the water body through the RBMP process (separate OR Is the site allocation improvements, through the river basin any downgrading in formally set against it may result in a loss of in place (separate could help address or additional SUDS for response required to expand on these issues) planning process (detailed water body status or through the RBMP the development amenity and residual report, discussion with would prevent being sensitive water 2. Highlight requirements that will need implemented if factual report required to ensure necessary process eg. Links to proposed in the nuisance to surrounding sitesPUM and referal to implemented? features, green protection and improvement measures set against the water justify this request) improvements set green/blue networks, allocation a SEPA URRT required) OR network body through the RBMP process are to be met. against a water body restoration regulated Site is for a process connection)? 3.Highlight addition mitigation and improvement measures through the river basin opportunities , SUDS process? which would require not formally assigned through the RBMP process that we planning process are retofit, water saving regulation by SEPA but can encourage (eg. restoration, better integration with achieved. technologies etc it is unlikely to be existing blue networks, morphological improvements, SUDS authorised due to retrofit, water saving technologies, eradication of invasive inability to mitigate risks non-native species etc) (separate report, discussion with PUM 4. Please identify where appropriate water environment and referal to URRT relevant development requirements are attached in order that required) we can support these in our response

Site may be distant from the sewerage network but expect foul No drainage to connect to the public sewer.

Foul drainage should connect to the public sewer. No

Multiple septic tank and treatment plant discharges already exist Closed Landfill (WML/W/0000221) No Yes Bombo burn Non-baseline Yes in this area. There is a need for first time sewerage provision. within 500m. Any possible issues should be controlled by the Licence Conditions.

No No Foul drainage should connect to the public sewer. No

It would be preferable if the discharge of sewage was connected No No Kilbride Burn Non-baseline to the public sewer. If this is not possible then disinfection may be No required due to the proximity to the Seamill Bathing Water.

No No Unnamed burn Non-baseline Foul drainage should connect to the public sewer. No

Foul drainage should connect to the public sewer. No

Foul drainage should connect to the public sewer. No

Merkland Burn Site appears to be distant from the public sewer. Any proposed No No and unnamed Non-baseline private drainage arrangements must comply with SEPA No burn requirements.

Glen Cloy No No Baseline Good Foul drainage must connect to the public foul sewer. No Water plus tribs

Strathwhillan Brodick Waste Transfer Station No No Non-baseline Foul drainage must connect to the public foul sewer. Yes Burn (WML/W/0220272/ within 1km. Any possible issues should be controlled by the Licence Conditions.

Tribs of No No Non-baseline Foul drainage must connect to the public foul sewer. No Benlister Burn

Site appears to be distant from the public sewer. Any proposed private drainage arrangements must comply with SEPA No requirements. SNH's comments on 'call for sites' [OFFICIAL] 15/11/2016 10:49 Cc: LDP

Planning Officer Planning Services Economic Growth Services North Ayrshire Council Cunninghame House Irvine KA12 8EE

Direct Line: -----

Please find attached SNH's response with regard to the consultation on Suggested sites for LDP2. I have colour coded our comments in the attached spreadsheet, green for sites with least concern, red for sites with most concern. For proposed development sites close to SSSI's/SPA's I have amber colour coded these to alert the presence of the designated site but we may not have concerns with the proposals themselves. I hope this makes sense, any queries give me a shout.

Kind Regards

Operations Officer Strathclyde & Ayrshire

--

********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or the sender.

Please note that for business purposes, outgoing and incoming emails from and to SNH may be monitored.

Tha am post-dealain seo agus fiosrachadh sam bith na chois dìomhair agus airson an neach no buidheann ainmichte a- mhàin. Mas e gun d’ fhuair sibh am post-dealain seo le mearachd, cuiribh fios dhan manaidsear-siostaim no neach- sgrìobhaidh.

Thoiribh an aire airson adhbharan gnothaich, ‘s dòcha gun tèid sùil a chumail air puist-dealain a’ tighinn a-steach agus a’ dol a- mach bho SNH.

********************************************************************** - LDP2 SuggestedSites spreadsheet - SNH comments - 2 November 2016.xlsx ldp2 suggestedsites spreadsheet - snh comments - 2 november 2016.xlsx

[Public] Intended for public disclosure [Official] Restricted to Council staff and contractors, with possible controlled public release on request [Official-Protect] Personal or business sensitive data intended to be shared only with named recipients and requiring protection REF ID LOCATION SNH comments PROPOSED USE CFS01 1953 The Den No comment. Housing ‐ approx 12 units CFS02 2289 Field to north of Margareoch No comment. Housing ‐ 2 units (St Margarets) CFS03 2593 Site to East of Sharphil Cottage No comment. Housing ‐ 4 units

CFS04 2913 AREA A, LAND ADJACENT TO No comment. Industrial ‐ expansion of maturation warehouse site. 20 CHIVAS BROTHERS LTD warehouses, floor area 50,000sq.m. & associated infrastructure. CFS05 2914 AREA B, LAND ADJACENT TO No comment. Industrial ‐ expansion of maturation warehouse site. 20 CHIVAS BTOTHERS LTD warehouses, floor area 50,000sq.m. & associated infrastructure. CFS06 3234 Barrmill Community and No comment. Residential Development ‐ 45 units as enabling Residential Development development for Community Centre project including market garden, landscaped areas & wind turbine

CFS07 3235 Old Toll House, Lochlibo Housing design would need Housing ‐ 100 units Rd,Irvine to include a buffer to ensure housing was not a threat to the adjacent Ancient Woodland.

CFS08 3236 Chapelton Road No comment. Housing ‐ 120 units CFS15 3873 Wood Farm, Dalry Road, No comment. Housing ‐ 173 units Kilwinning CFS16 3874 N‐W part of N‐W field at No comment. Housing or Mixed Use Highfield Farm CFS17 3875 Gap Site at Highfield Village No comment. Housing (on C99 road) CFS18 4530 Bridgend, Dalry No comment. Housing CFS19 4531 West Bankside No comment. Housing 200‐250 units CFS20 4532 land to the south of West No comment. Housing ‐ 100 units Kilbride Road (B780) and south west of Kittyshaw Road, Dalry CFS21 4533 Land to the south of the B714 No comment. Housing 20‐25 units (opposite Trinity Drive)and to the west of A737 Kilwinning Road, Dalry

CFS22 4545 Grahamston Avenue, No comment. Housing. 90 units already in Housing Land Audit ‐ NA 0512 Glengarnock & 0537 CFS23 4547 Former ICI NylonSalts Plant Housing 20 units Site not showing up in shapefiles? Carpark CFS24 4833 Land at Sorbie Farm, Sharphill No comment. Housing 500 units

CFS25 5153 Site to the south east of No comment. Housing 12‐15 units Woodlea Cottage, CFS26A 5155 Area 1 Whitehirst Kilwinning No comment. Housing 140 units

CFS26B 5475 Area 2 Whitehirst Kilwinning No comment. Housing 35 units

CFS27 5156 Site To West Of Dalry Road, Mixed Use Housing/Retail/Leisure Site not showing up in shapefiles? Chapelhill, Ardrossan CFS28 5158 Site to the east of Craiglea No comment. Retail unit (Bike hire) & Café Court CFS29 5159 Ormidale South Concerns about felling Tourism/Residential ‐ tourist accommodation mature woodland for (glamping/self catering units) & staff accommodation proposed development. Woodland at this site is listed on the Native Woodland Survey of Scotland. CFS31 5474 Ormidale Hotel Concerns about felling Expansion of hotel business ‐ annexe/chalets/staff mature woodland for accommodation proposed development. CFS32 5477 Site to the south of Craiglea No comment. Housing ‐ 1 unit Court CFS33 5489 north kiscadale Appropriate buffer required Housing ‐ 75 units between Cat Burn and any housing. CFS34 5491 knockankelly No comment. Housing ‐ 70 units CFS35 5793 Land to the west of No comment. Housing ‐ 100‐150 units Wingfaulds Avenue/Fairlie Moor Road, Dalry CFS36 5796 Rockfield The nearest designated sites Arran Moor SPA (notified for hen harrier) and Arran Moors SSSI (notified for hen harrier, breeding bird assemblage and Upland assemblage) are 0.5KM to the north west of the proposed site. Drumadoon ‐ Tormore SSSI (notified for Permian‐Triassic (reed beds) and Tertiary Igneous) is also situated less than 1km to the west of the proposed site.

Housing ‐ 16+ units CFS37 5797 Burnside Appropriate buffer required between Blackwater River and any housing. Housing ‐ 26+ units CFS38 5798 Seafield No comment. Housing 22+ units CFS39 5799 Dippin Road, Mayfield Farm, No comment. KA27 8RN Housing (self build plots) 15 units CFS40 5800 Blairbeg No comment. 1 House CFS41 5801 Merkland Bridge site Proposed development site is surrounded by ancient woodland and so we would be concerned about any felling/development in this area. Housing ‐ 10 units CFS42 5809 Mount Pleasant Farm and No comment. Cottage Housing ‐ 2 or more CFS43 5811 Land to the north of No comment. Housing ‐ 100‐125 Willowyards Road/West of Morrishill Drive, Beith CFS44 5812 land to the south of Kilbirnie No comment. Housing/Community Green Space. 100‐125 units & Place Golf Course/West of potential phase 2 40‐50 units Newhouse Drive Beith CFS45 8033 Land at Carsehead Foundry, No comment. Housing, retail or Leisure Dalry

CFS46 5819 Southview, Shiskine, Isle of No comment. Housing 4‐5 units Arran. CFS47 5820 Greenfield, Torbeg, Isle of The nearest designated sites Housing 10‐12 units Arran. Arran Moor SPA (notified for hen harrier) and Arran Moors SSSI (notified for hen harrier, breeding bird assemblage and Upland assemblage) are 0.5KM to the north west of the proposed site. Drumadoon ‐ Tormore SSSI (notified for Permian‐Triassic (reed beds) and Tertiary Igneous) is also situated less than 1km to the west of the proposed site.

CFS48 6113 Brisbane Glen Road The proposed development Housing ‐ 86 units including ifrastructure, greenspace, site is within Clyde Muirshiel landscaping etc & carpark tto allow easier access to Regional Park. Meridian Pillars & conservatory Access/recreation opportunities along river corridor should be maximised where possible. A buffer should be in place between the development and nearby Ancient Woodland. A buffer should also be in place between the development and Noddsdale water. CFS49 No West Bankside Farm # Housing ‐ 200‐250 units num ber? CFS50 6131 Laigh Letter No comment. Housing ‐ 2 units CFS51 6433 Mayfield Farm No comment. Housing ‐ 300 units CFS52 6434 Land at Meadowside, Beith No comment. Housing CFS53 6437 Fereneze Lodge No comment. 1 house CFS54 6438 Land at Ardmhor No comment. Housing CFS55 6439 Birchgrove No comment. 1 house CFS56 6440 Site To North Of The Orchards, No comment. Housing ‐ approx 35 units Law Brae, West Kilbride

CFS57 6441 Site To South Of Lawoodhead, The proposed site is 5 houses, flood amelioration and Equestrian/commercial Springside, West Kilbride adjacent to the boundary of development Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. Access/recreational opportunities should be maximised where possible. Buffer should also be in place between any housing and kilbride burn.

CFS58 6442 Former Farmfield Farm Site, The proposed site is Housing ‐ 280 units North Of Ardrossan High adjacent to the boundary of Road, West Kilbride Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. Access/recreational opportunities should be maximised where possible.

CFS59 6443 Tournament Park, Kilwinning Design linking corridors Mixed use ‐ Residential/Commercial Leisure, retail, hotel, Road, Irvine between the ancient restaurant etc. woodland fragments where possible and ensure buffer zone between any new development the Ancient Woodland. CFS60 6450 Newton Shore, Lochranza The proposed site is less Housing than 1km from North Newton Shore SSSI (notified for non‐marine devonian). An existing core path runs adjacent to the site and so access to this should be maintained.

CFS61 6451 Ross Road Field Site is adjacent to the Caravan site ‐ 24‐30 pitches and toilet/washing facilities boundary of Arran Moors SPA (notified for hen harrier) & Arran Moors SSSI (notified for hen harrier, breeding bird assemblage and upland assemblage). An existing core path runs adjacent to the site and so access to this should be maintained.

CFS62 6453 Land to the east of Hallmark An adeqate buffer is Housing Hotel required between the River Irvine and any housing. There is also an existing core path that runs across the site and so access to this should be maintained.

CFS63 6454 Underbank, Southannan No comment. Housing ‐25 units Estate, Fairlie CFS64 6455 Upper Chapelton, Seamill No comment. Housing ‐ 60 units

CFS65 6458 Portencross Road No comment. Housing & potential school site CFS66 6459 Main Road, Fairlie No comment. Housing CFS67 6460 Shore Lodge and Walled Adjacent to a section of Housing 10 units Garden ancient woodland and so a buffer zone would be required between any housing and the woodland.

CFS68 6462 National Offshore Wind This site is situated in the Offshore wind turbine test facility Turbine Test Facility adjacent to Southannan Sands SSSI (notified for sandflats). CFS69 6465 WHM Nethermains Road, Buffer will be required Retain Housing allocation RES2(10) ‐ 100 units Kilwinning between any housing and the River Garnock. Recreation/access opportunities should be enhanced along the river where possible. CFS70 6466 Ardeer Peninsula We are anticipating this Housing ‐ 2000+ units and Combined Heat & Power whole Ardeer peninsula will energy station. be recognised as a SINC in the revised LDP2. So would have concerns about any potential development in this area.

CFS71 6467 Land at the String, Shiskine No comment. Potential eduction/ty uses CFS72 6470 West of alisa cottage No comment. 1 house CFS73 6471 Chapelton Shorefield, Seamill Coastal saltmarsh habitats Housing 90 present in this location which is suceptible to sea spray. Adequate buffer required from saltmarsh habitat and housing.

CFS74 6475 Noddsdale Meadow The proposed development Housing 80 site is within Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. Access/recreation opportunities along river corridor should be maximised where possible. A buffer should be in place between the development and nearby ancient woodland. A buffer should also be in place between the development and Noddsdale water.

CFS75 6756 North of 122 Dalry Road, No comment. Housing 15 units & play area Ardrossan CFS76 6769 Meadowfoot, Ardrossan High No comment. Housing 5 units Rd, West Kilbride CFS77 6755 Former Ayrshire Metal Proposed development is Enlargement of RES 2 (7) allocated site. Products site adjacent to Bogside flats SSSI (notified for mudflats and saltmarsh). For any proposed development the design of the coastal interface must compliment SSSI interests.

CFS14 7073 Kerelaw, Stevenston Any proposed development Housing ‐ 80 units on allocated RES2 site should retain a buffer with the Karelaw burn and access opportunities should be maximised.

CFS80 7713 Hunterston A Proposed development is Development associated with decommissioning of nuclear situated adjacent to both power station etc Southannan Sands SSSI (notified for sandflats) and Portencross Woods SSSI (notified for upland mixed ash woodland).

CFS81 6753 Irvine Harbourside No comment. Housing/Tourism ‐ Hotel, Commercial ‐ offices/café/restaurant/retail & health/leisure uses CFS82 7393 Lynnholm Farm Nearest designated site is Housing Lynn Spout SSSI (Lower Carboniferous notified feature) which is 0.5km to the west of the proposed development site. Any development would need to ensure the river corridor remains free of development with an adequate buffer. We recommend consulting SEPA with regards to flood risk for this site.

3554 No comment. Ecohousing to protect farmland. 5473 No comment. WK car park.

We've looked again at previous responses to call for sites consultations. The first (November 2016 – attached)) was sent by and I note that she did colour code it ‐ the meaning of her colour coding is indicated in her cover email (table and her cover email attached) and clearly does not relate to landscape. then sent a follow‐up email (also attached) clarifying that the comments did not include landscape advice. We then sent landscape comments as part of our MIR response (attached).

It's for you to determine what you call that part of your 'deliverability' assessment but yes, please remove reference to SNH from any material that you’re presenting to committee/ other stakeholders. As discussed, the green/amber/red value, and the description you have given for each does not relate to our landscape advice. At best it is gross simplification of our response to the MIR (attached) and at worst it’s a misinterpretation of our advice on the suitability of some of these sites. I suppose something like "Landscape and Biodiversity" would make sense, but the key thing to highlight is that this is your assessment, not SNH's.

Re: "Objections & No comments" – CFS07 & CFS90

If CFS07 went forward to the Proposed Plan, we would make a representation to the effect that we did not think this was a suitable place for development and that it should be removed from the plan. We would support this with a detailed analysis of the landscape impacts, drawing on the information in the SEA, which has, quite rightly, flagged this as RED in terms of landscape impacts. We’ve since learnt that the adjacent Lawthorn Plantation appears on the 1st edition OS and appears to be remnant policy landscape. It is also a Scottish Wildlife Trust Nature Reserve along with nearby Sourlie Wood ‐ see https://scottishwildlifetrust.org.uk/reserve/lawthorn‐wood/ . This weblink also mentions Lawthorn is one of one of the nine “Irvine Greenspace Reserves.” (see below).

We note from our discussion that CFS90 on Arran will not be going forward to PP.

Other sites

We provided a range of comments on other sites as part of our response to the MIR (attached). Our expectation was that you would take this advice into account along with other considerations such as the evidence from HNDA and your stated spatial strategy. We recognize ‘deliverability’ is a key concern, but it is not clear from the proforma/ approach we’ve seen so far that this is being properly balanced against other considerations, with the objective of delivering successful places. The draft spatial strategy is to direct development to the “Urban Environment” but most of the major allocations appear to be peri‐urban and for many allocations it will be a challenge to achieve a good fit with landscape character. This is all in the context of a HNDA that suggests (as we understand it) that no significant land allocations need to be made to meet current demand. We look forward to seeing how our comments have been taken account of in terms of the sites that end up in the PP and your approach (e.g developer requirements, development briefs etc.) to ensuring the impacts we’ve raised are mitigated/ avoided. We’d be happy to have further discussions about the landscape impacts of these sites (and possible mitigation) with you and if that would be helpful. Similarly we’d be happy to advise on any alternative sites that could contribute to land supply, but with less significant landscape impacts.

Re: Arran sites. Thanks for letting know we'd be keen to be involved in the development of future masterplans. Our involvement will depend on which sites come forward in the plan and we'll have to consider our capacity to be involved in light of other demands at the time.

Your restored MailMeter archived email Administrator to: LDP 24/11/2016 10:18

------Forwarded message ------From: Sent (Date & Time): 03 November 2016, (15:23:33) To: ldp; Subject: RE: Consultation on Call for Sites, Suggested sites for LDP2 [PUBLIC]

Thank you for consulting SPT on the above

SPT has considered the sites in relation to proximity in relation to the our assessment the of new sites in relation to the existing bus and rail services.

I attach our assessment. I enclose our comments on the development sites for your use, along with the spread sheet of appendix B of the note for ease of manipulation, if required.

If you require any of the Shapefiles associated with the analysis, we are more than happy to share them.

In undertaking the site assessment for these new site, SPT would wish to encourage you to prioritise sites in terms of accessibility to existing public transport services.

As you will recall, SPT provided forecast information to you from the Strathclyde Integrated Transport Model and Strathclyde Integ rated Transport and Land Use Model to assist in the development of your first local development Plan. SPT, in partnership with Transport Scotland are currently renewing both of these models to assist in the assessment of the transport impacts of the City Region City Deal Projects. The new models should be completed and ready for use by the end of 2016. These models will be available for your use if your timeline allow and there would be benefit to you in developing your Main Issue Report. We are happy to discuss with the forecast information that will be available. Further information on both of the models is enclosed. While the attached sets out the capability of the models, our in house capacity for testing and analysis is much reduced, so further discussion is required around your requirements are and how best they can be met.< br>

If you require any additional information or clarification please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Regards

Sent: 07 October 2016 5:22 PM To: LDP Subject: Consultation on Call for Sites, Suggested sites for LDP2 [PUBLIC]

We are reviewing our current Local Development Plan (LDP), and moving towards preparation of a replacement plan or ‘LDP2’.

To help us prepare the MIR, we have undertaken a ‘Call for Sites’ exercise to identify sites within North Ayrshire that may have potential for development. We invited landowners, potential developers and the public to suggest sites that may contribute toward North Ayrshire’s fut ure housing, employment, retail, leisure and infrastructural needs during 2019-2029.

We would be grateful if you could provide us with any comments you may have in relation to these suggested sites. Could you please return any comments to us within 28 days.

Should you require any further information, please contact or email us at [email protected]

I attach a spreadsheet with details of the sites, together with ArcGIS shapefiles of the site boundaries. If this format is unsuitable, please contact us. Alternatively, the boundaries can be viewed at: http://www.geo.north-ayrshire.gov.uk/Sites/Suggested_LDP2_Sites/ (See attached file: LDP2SuggestedSites.xlsx)(See attached file: LDP2_SuggestedSites.dbf)(See attached file: LDP2_SuggestedSites.shp)(See attached file: LDP2_SuggestedSites.s hx)

Development Plans Team North Ayrshire Council Cunninghame House Irvine KA12 8EE

* Please help reduce waste. Don't print this email unless absolutely necessary. **

This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is

addressed and is not intended to be relied upon by any person

without subsequent written confirmation of its contents. Accordingly,

North Ayrshire Council disclaim all responsibility and accept no liability

(including in negligence) for the consequences for any person

acting, or refraining from acting, on such information prior to the

receipt by those persons of subsequent written confirmation.

If you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone. Please also destroy and delete the messag e from your computer.

Any form of unauthorised reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication of any part of this e-mail message (or attachments transmitted with it) by the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. Please be advised that North Ayrshire Council's incoming and outgoing

e-mail is subject to regular monitoring.

"This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses and malicious content."

Please consider the environment - do you need to print this email? STRATHCLYDE PARTNERSHIP for TRANSPORT www.spt.co.uk This communication and any attachments may include privileged, confidential and/or copyright information. It is intended for the "addressee" only. The contents should not to be disclosed to anyone other than the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee, please note that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the email and any attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee and have received the email by mistake, please return it to the sender and then delete the email and destroy any copies of it. This email and any files transmitted with it, do not necessarily contain the views of Strathclyde Partnership for Transport.

- 7623NMJB_Appendix B.xlsx - 7623NMJB_NAC Site analysis LDP2 (November 2016)

.docx - Transport Models background note .docx 7623nmjb_appendix b.xlsx

7623nmjb_nac site analysis ldp2 (november 2016) .docx transport models background note .docx

[Public] Intended for public disclosure [Official] Restricted to Council staff and contractors, with possible controlled public release on request [Official-Protect] Personal or business sensitive data intended to be shared only with named recipients and requiring protection

North Ayrshire

Summary of Bus and Rail Data

Information provided by SPT

(November 2016)

V.1 Key Statistics: Bus1

. There are a total of 1,076 bus stops located within the North Ayrshire local authority area (See Appendix A map for an overview of bus stop locations).

. 523 bus stops within North Ayrshire are served by at least 1 bus per hour, every hour between the hours of 7am and 7pm on weekdays. This equates to 49% of all bus stops within North Ayrshire.

. 93 stops within North Ayrshire are served by at least 6 buses per hour, every hour between the hours of 7am and 7pm on weekdays. This equates to 9% of all bus stops within North Ayrshire. Key Statistics: Rail2

There are 12 rail stations located within the North Ayrshire local authority area (see Appendix A map for an overview of station locations). Those stations are:

Ardrossan Harbour, Ardrossan South Beach, Ardrossan Town, Dalry, Fairlie, Glengarnock, Irvine, Kilwinning, Largs, Saltcoats, Stevenston, West Kilbride.

The table below shows train service levels at rail stations within North Ayrshire. The information is representative of the AM and PM peak hours and shows the number of trains heading inbound towards Glasgow during the AM peak and outbound from Glasgow during the PM peak.

Station AM (Inbound) PM (Outbound)

Ardrossan Harbour ‐ 1 Ardrossan South Beach 2 3 Ardrossan Town ‐ 1 Dalry 3 3 Fairlie 2 2 Glengarnock 4 4 Irvine 5 5 Kilwinning 8 7 Largs 2 2 Saltcoats 2 3 Stevenston 2 3 West Kilbride 2 2

1 Information relating to bus stop location and frequency is derived using SPT’s corporate database, SPT’s Transport Accessibility calculator and Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The Transport Accessibility calculator measures the frequency of bus services at any stops within the SPT area for any time period on any day. 2 ScotRail Timetable August 2016

2 | Page

Summary of Development Sites

Site analysis has been carried out for the 81 sites identified by North Ayrshire Council and supplied to SPT as GIS Shapefiles to carry out accessibility analysis. The accessibility analysis looked at each site’s proximity to current bus stops and rail stations based on 400m and 800m crow‐fly3 distances respectively.

Appendix B provides a summary table for each of the development sites and highlights the transport provision associated.

 Of the 81 development sites submitted, 64 fall wholly or partially within 400m of a bus stop.

 35 of the development sites fall wholly or partially within 400m of a bus stop served by at least 1 bus per hour, every hour between 7am and 7pm on weekdays.

 7 out of the 81 development sites fall wholly or partially within 400m of a bus stop served by at least 6 buses per hour, every hour between 7am and 7pm on weekdays.

 18 out of the 81 development sites fall wholly or partially within 800m of a rail station.

 16 of the sites do not fall within 400m or 800m proximity of a bus stop or rail station respectively.

3 400m and 800m distances are used as a general measure of acceptable walking distance to each mode. Note: actual walk in distances may be longer (than crow‐fly) depending on the local geography.

3 | Page

Public transport service and infrastructure requirements

The accessibility analysis looked at each site’s proximity to rail stations, current bus stops and the bus network as of October 2016.

The commercial nature of the bus network means that it can change over time. As a result of this, accessibility of a site may change. A predication cannot be made as to how service routes and levels may change over the next 5 years.

For sites where access to the existing transport network is limited, it is not possible to take a view as to the levels of bus infrastructure or bus service enhancements required to improve the accessibility until information is available around the scale of development, phased delivery approach, likely access points and therefore the likely demand arising from the development proposal.

In considering the deliverability of each site under review, the potential infrastructure and service requirements should be considered:

 If a site does not fall within 400m of any bus stop location or within 800m of a rail station, there may be a need to support the introduction/rerouting of a bus service(s) and provide associated infrastructure, the cost of which would require to be met by the developer.

 If a site falls partially within 400m of any bus stop location or 800m of a rail station, there may be a need to provide additional stop infrastructure to support the introduction/rerouting of a bus services for a site, the cost of which would require to be met by the developer.

 If a site does not fall within 400m of a bus stop served by a regular bus service i.e. a stop served at least once an hour every hour 7am to 7pm, it may be necessary to provide bus service improvements in the area, which would potentially require funding support from a developer.

 Where sites fall within 400m of any bus stop location and/or within 800m of a rail station, direct and attractive pedestrian links to these facilities are essential.

4 | Page

Appendix A

5 | Page

Appendix B

Site within Site within 400m of a bus 400m of a bus stop served by stop served by Site within Site at least 1 bus at least 6 bus Site within 800m of a Location Arran/Mainland 400m of a Ref per hour, every per hour, every rail station. bus stop. hour between hour between 7am and 7pm 7am and 7pm on weekdays. on weekdays. Filter lane CFS12 Mainland Y Y Y N Roundabout bypass CFS13 Mainland Y Y Y N Site To West Of Dalry Road, Chapelhill, Ardrossan CFS27 Mainland Y Y Y N Tournament Park, Kilwinning Road, Irvine CFS59 Mainland Y Y Y N Land to the east of Hallmark Hotel CFS62 Mainland Y Y Y N WHM Nethermains Road, Kilwinning CFS69 Mainland Y Y Y N North of 122 Dalry Road, Ardrossan CFS75 Mainland Y Y Y N School rolling drop off area CFS11 Mainland Y Y N Y Wood Farm CFS15 Mainland Y Y N Y Bridgend, Dalry CFS18 Mainland Y Y N Y Grahamston Avenue, Glengarnock CFS22 Mainland Y Y N Y WK car Park CFS30 Mainland Y Y N Y Site To North Of The Orchards, Law Brae, West Kilbride CFS56 Mainland Y Y N Y Site To South Of Lawoodhead, Springside, West Kilbride CFS57 Mainland Y Y N Y Former Farmfield Farm Site, North Of Ardrossan High Road, West Kilbride CFS58 Mainland Y Y N Y Portencross Road CFS65 Mainland Y Y N Y Ardeer Peninsula CFS70 Mainland Y Y N Y Meadowfoot, Ardrossan High Rd, West Kilbride CFS76 Mainland Y Y N Y Former Ayrshire Metal Products site CFS77 Mainland Y Y N Y Lynnholm Farm CFS82 Mainland Y Y N Y Chapelton Road CFS08 Mainland Y Y N N Eco housing to protect farmland CFS09 Mainland Y Y N N Private self build amenity housing including social for Local residents CFS10 Mainland Y Y N N Kerelaw CFS14 Mainland Y Y N N West Bankside CFS19 Mainland Y Y N N Land to the south of the B714 (opposite Trinity Drive)and to the west of A737 Kilwinning Road, Dalry CFS21 Mainland Y Y N N Land at Sorbie Farm, Sharphill CFS24 Mainland Y Y N N Land to the north of Willowyards Road/West of Morrishill Drive, Beith CFS43 Mainland Y Y N N

6 | Page

Site within Site within 400m of a bus 400m of a bus stop served by stop served by Site within Site at least 1 bus at least 6 bus Site within 800m of a Location Arran/Mainland 400m of a Ref per hour, every per hour, every rail station. bus stop. hour between hour between 7am and 7pm 7am and 7pm on weekdays. on weekdays. land to the south of Kilbirnie Place Golf Course/West of Newhouse Drive, Beith CFS44 Mainland Y Y N N West Bankside Farm CFS49 Mainland Y Y N N Mayfield Farm CFS51 Mainland Y Y N N Land at Meadowside, Beith CFS52 Mainland Y Y N N Upper Chapelton, Seamill CFS64 Mainland Y Y N N Main Road, Fairlie CFS66 Mainland Y Y N N Chapelton Shorefield, Seamill CFS73 Mainland Y Y N N Former ICI NylonSalts Plant Carpark CFS23 Mainland Y N N Y Area 1 Whitehirst Kilwinning CFS26A Mainland Y N N Y Area 2 Whitehirst Kilwinning CFS26B Mainland Y N N Y Irvine Harbourside CFS81 Mainland Y N N Y Barrmill Community and Residential Development CFS06 Mainland Y N N N Old Toll House, Lochlibo Rd,Irvine CFS07 Mainland Y N N N land to the south of West Kilbride Road (B780) and south west of Kittyshaw Road, Dalry CFS20 Mainland Y N N N Land to the west of Wingfaulds Avenue/Fairlie Moor Road, Dalry CFS35 Mainland Y N N N Brisbane Glen Road CFS48 Mainland Y N N N Noddsdale Meadow CFS74 Mainland Y N N N Field to north of Margareoch (St Margarets) CFS02 Arran Y N N N Site to the south east of Woodlea Cottage, CFS25 Arran Y N N N Site to the east of Craiglea Court CFS28 Arran Y N N N Ormidale South CFS29 Arran Y N N N Ormidale Hotel CFS31 Arran Y N N N Site to the south of Craiglea Court CFS32 Arran Y N N N north kiscadale CFS33 Arran Y N N N knockankelly CFS34 Arran Y N N N Rockfield CFS36 Arran Y N N N Burnside CFS37 Arran Y N N N Seafield CFS38 Arran Y N N N Dippin Road, Mayfield Farm, KA27 8RN CFS39 Arran Y N N N Blairbeg CFS40 Arran Y N N N

7 | Page

Site within Site within 400m of a bus 400m of a bus stop served by stop served by Site within Site at least 1 bus at least 6 bus Site within 800m of a Location Arran/Mainland 400m of a Ref per hour, every per hour, every rail station. bus stop. hour between hour between 7am and 7pm 7am and 7pm on weekdays. on weekdays. Mount Pleasant Farm and Cottage CFS42 Arran Y N N N Southview, Shiskine, Isle of Arran. CFS46 Arran Y N N N Laigh Letter CFS50 Arran Y N N N Fereneze Lodge CFS53 Arran Y N N N Shore Lodge and Walled Garden CFS67 Arran Y N N N Land at the String, Shiskine CFS71 Arran Y N N N Land at Carsehead Foundry CFS45 Mainland N N N Y The Den CFS01 Mainland N N N N Site to East of Sharphil Cottage CFS03 Mainland N N N N AREA A, LAND ADJACENT TO CHIVAS BROTHERS LTD CFS04 Mainland N N N N AREA B, LAND ADJACENT TO CHIVAS BTOTHERS LTD CFS05 Mainland N N N N N‐W part of N‐W field at Highfield Farm CFS16 Mainland N N N N Gap Site at Highfield Village (on C99 road) CFS17 Mainland N N N N Underbank, Southannan Estate, Fairlie CFS63 Mainland N N N N National Offshore Wind Turbine Test Facility CFS68 Mainland N N N N Hunterston A CFS80 Mainland N N N N Merkland Bridge site CFS41 Arran N N N N Greenfield, Torbeg, Isle of Arran. CFS47 Arran N N N N Land at Ardmhor CFS54 Arran N N N N Birchgrove CFS55 Arran N N N N Newton Shore, Lochranza CFS60 Arran N N N N Ross Road Field CFS61 Arran N N N N West of Alisa cottage CFS72 Arran N N N N

8 | Page

Site within 400m of a bus Site within 400m of a bus stop stop served by at least 1 Site within 400m of served by at least 6 bus per Site within 800m of a rail Location Site Ref Arran/Mainland bus per hour, every hour a bus stop hour, every hour between 7am station between 7am and 7pm on and 7pm on weekdays weekdays

1 Filter lane CFS12 Mainland y Y Y N 2 Roundabout bypass CFS13 Mainland y Y Y N 3 Site To West Of Dalry Road, Chapelhill, Ardrossan CFS27 Mainland y Y Y N 4 Tournament Park, Kilwinning Road, Irvine CFS59 Mainland y Y Y N 5 Land to the east of Hallmark Hotel CFS62 Mainland y Y Y N 6 WHM Nethermains Road, Kilwinning CFS69 Mainland y Y Y N 7 North of 122 Dalry Road, Ardrossan CFS75 Mainland y Y Y N 8 School rolling drop off area CFS11 Mainland y Y N Y 9 Wood Farm CFS15 Mainland y Y N Y 10 Bridgend, Dalry CFS18 Mainland y Y N Y 11 Grahamston Avenue, Glengarnock CFS22 Mainland y Y N Y 12 WK car Park CFS30 Mainland y Y N Y 13 Site To North Of The Orchards, Law Brae, West Kilbride CFS56 Mainland y Y N Y 14 Site To South Of Lawoodhead, Springside, West Kilbride CFS57 Mainland y Y N Y 15 Former Farmfield Farm Site, North Of Ardrossan High Road, West Kilbride CFS58 Mainland y Y N Y 16 Portencross Road CFS65 Mainland y Y N Y 17 Ardeer Peninsula CFS70 Mainland y Y N Y 18 Meadowfoot, Ardrossan High Rd, West Kilbride CFS76 Mainland y Y N Y 19 Former Ayrshire Metal Products site CFS77 Mainland y Y N Y 20 Lynnholm Farm CFS82 Mainland y Y N Y 21 Chapelton Road CFS08 Mainland y Y N N 22 Eco housing to protect farmland CFS09 Mainland y Y N N 23 Private self build amenity housing including social for Local residents CFS10 Mainland y Y N N 24 Kerelaw CFS14 Mainland y Y N N 25 West Bankside CFS19 Mainland y Y N N 26 Land to the south of the B714 (opposite Trinity Drive)and to the west of A737 Kilwinning Road, Dalry CFS21 Mainland y Y N N 27 Land at Sorbie Farm, Sharphill CFS24 Mainland y Y N N 28 Land to the north of Willowyards Road/West of Morrishill Drive, Beith CFS43 Mainland y Y N N 29 land to the south of Kilbirnie Place Golf Course/West of Newhouse Drive, Beith CFS44 Mainland y Y N N 30 West Bankside Farm CFS49 Mainland y Y N N 31 Mayfield Farm CFS51 Mainland y Y N N 32 Land at Meadowside, Beith CFS52 Mainland y Y N N 33 Upper Chapelton, Seamill CFS64 Mainland y Y N N 34 Main Road, Fairlie CFS66 Mainland y Y N N 35 Chapelton Shorefield, Seamill CFS73 Mainland y Y N N 36 Former ICI NylonSalts Plant Carpark CFS23 Mainland y N N Y 37 Area 1 Whitehirst Kilwinning CFS26A Mainland y N N Y 38 Area 2 Whitehirst Kilwinning CFS26B Mainland y N N Y 39 Irvine Harbourside CFS81 Mainland y N N Y 40 Barrmill Community and Residential Development CFS06 Mainland y N N N 41 Old Toll House, Lochlibo Rd,Irvine CFS07 Mainland y N N N 42 land to the south of West Kilbride Road (B780) and south west of Kittyshaw Road, Dalry CFS20 Mainland y N N N 43 Land to the west of Wingfaulds Avenue/Fairlie Moor Road, Dalry CFS35 Mainland y N N N 44 Brisbane Glen Road CFS48 Mainland y N N N 45 Noddsdale Meadow CFS74 Mainland y N N N 46 Field to north of Margareoch (St Margarets) CFS02 Arran y N N N 47 Site to the south east of Woodlea Cottage, CFS25 Arran y N N N 48 Site to the east of Craiglea Court CFS28 Arran y N N N 49 Ormidale South CFS29 Arran y N N N 50 Ormidale Hotel CFS31 Arran y N N N 51 Site to the south of Craiglea Court CFS32 Arran y N N N 52 north kiscadale CFS33 Arran y N N N 53 knockankelly CFS34 Arran y N N N 54 Rockfield CFS36 Arran y N N N 55 Burnside CFS37 Arran y N N N 56 Seafield CFS38 Arran y N N N 57 Dippin Road, Mayfield Farm, KA27 8RN CFS39 Arran y N N N 58 Blairbeg CFS40 Arran y N N N 59 Mount Pleasant Farm and Cottage CFS42 Arran y N N N 60 Southview, Shiskine, Isle of Arran. CFS46 Arran y N N N 61 Laigh Letter CFS50 Arran y N N N 62 Fereneze Lodge CFS53 Arran y N N N 63 Shore Lodge and Walled Garden CFS67 Arran y N N N 64 Land at the String, Shiskine CFS71 Arran y N N N 65 Land at Carsehead Foundry CFS45 Mainland N N N Y 66 The Den CFS01 Mainland N N N N 67 Site to East of Sharphil Cottage CFS03 Mainland N N N N 68 AREA A, LAND ADJACENT TO CHIVAS BROTHERS LTD CFS04 Mainland N N N N 69 AREA B, LAND ADJACENT TO CHIVAS BTOTHERS LTD CFS05 Mainland N N N N 70 N‐W part of N‐W field at Highfield Farm CFS16 Mainland N N N N 71 Gap Site at Highfield Village (on C99 road) CFS17 Mainland N N N N 72 Underbank, Southannan Estate, Fairlie CFS63 Mainland N N N N 73 National Offshore Wind Turbine Test Facility CFS68 Mainland N N N N 74 Hunterston A CFS80 Mainland N N N N 75 Merkland Bridge site CFS41 Arran N N N N 76 Greenfield, Torbeg, Isle of Arran. CFS47 Arran N N N N 77 Land at Ardmhor CFS54 Arran N N N N 78 Birchgrove CFS55 Arran N N N N 79 Newton Shore, Lochranza CFS60 Arran N N N N 80 Ross Road Field CFS61 Arran N N N N 81 West of Alisa cottage CFS72 Arran N N N N Transport Models background note

Strategic Transport Model

The strategic transport model is used to assess the impact of transport projects and policies. It allows users to test a wide variety of new highway and public transport (PT) projects to establish their likely impact on a region wide basis. It can also be used to test the impact of any changes to the existing network.

The Strategic Transport Model can be used to produce forecast data for:  Highway and PT demand  PT boarding and alighting figures  Highway flows  PT flows  Highway and PT trip demand forecasts  Highway and PT journey time forecasts  Input to economic appraisal processes

The strategic transport model has been used extensively on a range of projects including Fastlink, Park and Ride appraisal, Subway Modernisation, Bus Rapid Transit, M74 Completion and many others.

Strathclyde Integrated Transport and Land Use Model (SITLUM)

The integrated transport policy and land use model can be used to test the impact of transport policy and land use changes over a period of time.

Policy measures that can be tested include:  Fuel price change  Parking Policy change (cost and supply)  Public transport quality  Public transport service levels  New transport modes  Fare changes  Park and Ride

Land use measures that can be tested include:  Change in office/retail floor space allocation  Change in housing allocation  Change in industrial allocation

SITLUM produces an incremental 20 year regional forecast to demonstrate the likely impacts to both transport and land use.

The main strength of SITLUM is its ability to investigate large scale impacts of policies – ‘what if’ scenarios - that can assist in an initial sift of policy options within a relatively short timescale.

SITLUM can produce forecast data for:  trip demand (origins and destinations)  average distances travelled  mode choice  emissions  trip purpose  demographics  passenger kilometres  employment  vehicle kilometres  economics  average vehicle speeds

Page 3 of 4

For '2' sites, we are only likely to take those sites forward if our view changes on the deliverability of the site, and we will be contacting site owners to establish if any further evidence exists on this matter. We will contact you if any circumstances change in this respect. In the meantime, to assist with responses, we only require comments where there is additional detail in relation to any site, or a fundamental concern with a potential allocation. We have a record of any of your previous comments on those sites.

It is unlikely that sites categorised as '3' will be taken forward, irrespective of whether constraints affect the site or not, so there is no need to submit further comments on those sites; particularly if you submitted comments at an earlier stage of the process.

For sites classified as '4', there are a number of reasons these sites may not fit typical methodology, for reasons, including the following:

 For sites with a deemed capacity of under 4 units, we do not intend to include those sites as housing allocations. However, we may explore how settlement boundaries or edge of settlement/rural policies can accommodate small scale development - and some of these sites may fall within those criteria. Please note that in this event, the acceptability of those sites will be a development management matter. There is no need to comment on those sites; unless there is a fundamental opposition to a particular site.  Some category '4' sites are existing LDP allocations. We are not seeking to de-allocate LDP1 allocations, so comments are only required where there is a fundamental change in position relating to the site.  Some sites are seeking the extension of allocated LDP1 sites, but where no development has taken place. We do not intend to proceed with the extended sites to allocation, and therefore no comments are required.  Some sites are non-residential. General comments are welcome for those sites.  The Ardeer peninsula is classified as such because part of the submission was previously allocated. This is a project being explored through the Ayrshire Growth Deal. Previous comments and concerns are noted for this site. Any additional comments are welcome, particularly where further detail and new information can be provided. Given the status of the Ayrshire Growth Deal work, it is not currently known whether/how this project should feature in the LDP, so comments are welcome, to assist future consideration of the site.

In terms of cumulative capacity of development, sites falling within category '1' are estimated to be able to provide between 573 -715 units. Please note that as per the content of the Main Issues Report, we envisage this will not result in a substantial net increase in our total housing land supply, because we are looking to re- allocate some non-effective housing sites from the supply, to balance the volume of units added.

I recognise that some agencies will not need to comment on sites specifically. If this is the case, there is no requirement to respond. For anyone wishing to submit comments, I would be grateful for your response by 31 July 2017. For those agencies that have so far arranged meetings, I envisage that this will be a useful basis for discussion at our meeting.

In addition to this information, it is our intention to issue you with an initial draft of LDP policies for comment. This is currently being finalised and I hope to forward it to you for comment soon.

In terms of the content of the information on sites, the Council has not publicised the output from initial site assessments at this stage, and the eventual outcome that is represented in the Proposed LDP will reflect further discussions with agencies, sites proponents and public. Your comments will help inform future stages of this process. On this basis, I would be grateful if you could treat the site information as sensitive, and do not distribute this information. Should you require further information, or to meet site proponents, please advise me, and we can facilitate any such request.

Hope this is sufficient for your purposes. For any questions on any of the above, please contact me as below.

Kind regards,

Strategic Planning Manager Economy & Communities North Ayrshire Council Cunninghame House, Irvine, KA12 8EE 01294 324686

file:/ 30/08/2017 Page 4 of 4

Other message recipients: From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Cc: Reply To All

Thru Tracking: T478-011-71329-84388 www.thruinc.com

SPT - Strathclyde Partnership for Transport

Please consider the environment - do you need to print this email? STRATHCLYDE PARTNERSHIP for TRANSPORT www.spt.co.uk This communication and any attachments may include privileged, confidential and/or copyright information. It is intended for the "addressee" only. The contents should not to be disclosed to anyone other than the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee, please note that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the email and any attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee and have received the email by mistake, please return it to the sender and then delete the email and destroy any copies of it. This email and any files transmitted with it, do not necessarily contain the views of Strathclyde Partnership for Transport.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd

file:/// 30/08/2017

3rd November 2016

SCOTTISH WATER

The Bridge Development Plans Team Buchanan Gate Business Park North Ayrshire Council Cumbernauld Road Stepps Cunninghame House G33 6FB Irvine

KA12 8EE M:

W: www.scottishwater.co.uk E:

Dear ,

North Ayrshire Site Assessments LDP2 Consultation

Thank you for giving Scottish Water the opportunity to review and provide comment on North Ayrshire’s LDP2 Site Assessments.

To accompany this response, I have attached a spreadsheet which provides details regarding the available capacity within our water and waste water assets, servicing the proposed sites.

In addition, I have drawn specific attention to some sites which are in the immediate vicinity of or may cross strategic Scottish Water infrastructure and assets.

For sites containing large diameter and strategic infrastructure, it is necessary for Scottish Water to be consulted prior to any ground works being considered. Scottish Water reserves the right to gain 24 hour access to these assets should this be required. Further contact should be made to discuss appropriate stand-off distances between the infrastructure and any building works, to both protect the assets and the services to existing customers.

Those developers whose sites contain infrastructure should contact the Asset Impact Team using [email protected] as early as possible so that these can be investigated further.

Separate drainage systems are essential to being able to accommodate new development growth and minimise the impact of flows on both the sewerage network and wastewater treatment works. A totally separate drainage system will be required with the surface water discharging to a suitable outlet. Scottish Water supports the principle of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) as part of the design, which will be required to meet the specifications detailed in Sewers for Scotland (3rd Edition), should the developer wish the surface water system to vest in Scottish Water. It is important to note that Scottish Water will not adopt surface water drainage systems that require the flows to be pumped.

I trust that the above information is acceptable in line with your consultation. Should you require further clarification on any of the comments made, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Enabling Development and Our 5 Criteria

Scottish Water is committed to enabling development within Scotland and will continue to work with Local Authorities to highlight where there is available capacity within Scottish Water’s network. This allows development to occur in areas where the need to upgrade existing infrastructure is minimal, therefore reducing developer costs.

However, insufficient capacity should not be seen as a barrier to development. Scottish Water acknowledges that in some areas the capacity at our treatment works and within our existing network is insufficient to accommodate additional development without network reinforcement.

Should there be insufficient capacity for development at our water or wastewater treatment works (Part 4 Assets), Scottish Water will provide additional capacity if the Developer can meet the following criteria:-

1. The development is supported by the Local Plan and has full planning permission. If the capacity in the Scottish Water system is the only reason preventing a development gaining full planning then outline planning would be accepted.

2. The developer can confirm land ownership or control through a solicitor’s letter.

3. The developer can confirm plans are in place to mitigate any network constraints that will be created by the development through a Minute of Agreement with us or alternatively a letter showing commitment to mitigate network impact through Part 3 investment.

4. The developer confirms any time remaining on current planning permissions with the local council.

5. The developer can demonstrate reasonable proposals in terms of the development’s annual build rate.

On receipt of these criteria, Scottish Water will instigate a growth project to provide additional Part 4 capacity for development. Scottish Water will also work with SEPA, the Developer and the Local Authority to identify solutions to enable development to proceed.

In line with PAN 79, Scottish Water encourages developers to contact us as early as possible during the planning process in order to discuss the needs of their development. While we can advise of any major infrastructure issues that are known in an area e.g. a pump station which is at capacity, we cannot provide detailed information on the impact of a development without undertaking modelling investigations. As part of their residential development proposals it is essential that developers submit a Development Impact Assessment (DIA) Form, copies of which are available on our website www.scottishwater.co.uk . The information supplied on this form will be used to assess our assets capability in servicing their sites.

Once we have reviewed the ‘DIA report’ the developer will either receive notification that capacity is available within our water and waste network or that more detailed modelling of the network is required. If these investigations show that the development would have a detrimental effect on the service received by our existing customers the developer will be required to fund works to mitigate the effect of the development. The costs of any additional modelling and network reinforcement would be met by the developer although Scottish Water would make a Reasonable Cost Contributions 1 (RCC) towards this.

While Local Authorities could theoretically fund this modelling work Scottish Water would not be able to reimburse them. There is also a risk that any modelling that was undertaken this early in the process would have to be repeated later in the life of the development if more detail becomes available or if there are substantial changes to the Scottish Water network. Costs for upgrading the network would not be available without first undertaking these investigations.

Separate drainage systems are essential to being able to accommodate new development growth and minimise flows impact on both the sewerage network and wastewater treatment works. A totally separate drainage system will be required with the surface water discharging to a suitable outlet. Scottish Water supports the principle of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) as part of the design which will require to meet the specifications as detailed in Sewers for Scotland (2nd Edition), should the developer wish the surface water system to vest in Scottish Water. It is important to note that Scottish Water will not adopt surface water drainage systems that require the flows to be pumped.

1 The Provision of Water and Sewerage Services (Reasonable Cost) (Scotland) Regulations 2006 Water Treatment Waste Water Treatment Ref Location X Y Proposed Use works Water comments works Waste comments CFS01 The Den Housing ‐ approx 12 units Camphill WTW has Please note this site is 234393 653771 sufficient capacity. No known issues outwith waste water zone CFS02 Field to north of Margareoch (St There is currently Margarets) sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however Early engagement with Housing ‐ 2 units there is substantial growth Scottish Water is included in the 'call for recommended to discuss sites' and a Growth build out rates and to Project will be required in establish any potential 204561 627003 the future. investment at the WWTW CFS03 Site to East of Housing ‐ 4 units Sharphil Cottage Camphill WTW has Stevenson PFI has sufficient 225508 643530 sufficient capacity. No known issues capacity for development. No known issues. CFS04 AREA A, LAND Industrial ‐ expansion of ADJACENT TO maturation warehouse site. There should be no CHIVAS BROTHERS 20 warehouses, floor area Camphill WTW has issues however if LTD 50,000sq.m. & associated sufficient capacity. demand is high then infrastructure. further investigation is Please note this site is 237676 652650 likely to be required. outwith waste water zone CFS05 AREA B, LAND Industrial ‐ expansion of ADJACENT TO maturation warehouse site. CHIVAS BTOTHERS 20 warehouses, floor area There should be no Camphill WTW has LTD 50,000sq.m. & associated issues however if sufficient capacity. infrastructure. demand is high then further investigation is Please note this site is 237755 651756 likely to be required. outwith waste water zone CFS06 Barrmill Residential Development ‐ Community and 45 units as enabling Residential development for Development Community Centre project Further investigation including market garden, such as a Drainage landscaped areas & wind Impact Assessment (DIA) turbine Early engagement with is likely to be required to Scottish Water is establish what impact, if Camphill WTW has recommended to discuss any this development has sufficient capacity. build out rates and to on the existing network. establish any potential Early engagement with investment at the WWTW SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry process is strongly recommended. Please note there is a Combined sewer running through 236493 651560 No known issues North part of site. CFS07 Old Toll House, Housing ‐ 100 units Lochlibo Rd,Irvine

Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if Camphill WTW has be required to any this development has sufficient capacity. establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Meadowhead PFI has process is strongly sufficient capacity for 234574 641278 recommended development. CFS08 Chapelton Road Housing ‐ 120 units

Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to Camphill WTW has any this development has establish what impact, sufficient capacity. on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 220707 647238 recommended capacity for development. CFS14 Kerelaw, Housing ‐ 80 units on Stevenston allocated RES2 site

Please note there are 2 x 15" trunk mains and Please note there are 9"water main running existing combined sewers through site. Further within site. Further investigation such as investigation such as a Flow and Pressure test Drainage Impact is likely to be required Assessment (DIA) is likely to establish what to be required to impact, if any this establish what impact, if development has on any this development has the existing network. on the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry Bradan WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient process is strongly 226680 642643 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. recommended. CFS15 Wood Farm, Dalry Housing ‐ 173 units Road, Kilwinning Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Bradan WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 229988 644394 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS16 N‐W part of N‐W Housing or Mixed Use field at Highfield Farm Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure test is likely to be required to establish what impact, if any this development has on the existing network. Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly 230931 650220 sufficient capacity. recommended Outwith waste water zone CFS17 Gap Site at Housing Highfield Village (on C99 road) Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure test is likely to be required to establish what impact, if any this development has on the existing network. Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Please note this site is 230880 650127 sufficient capacity. recommended outwith waste water zone CFS18 Bridgend, Dalry Housing

Please note there is a Existing combined sewers Further investigation within site. Further such as Flow and investigation such as a Pressure test is likely to Drainage Impact be required to Assessment (DIA) is likely establish what impact, to be required to if any this establish what impact, if development has on any this development has the existing network. on the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient process is strongly 229558 649246 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. recommended. CFS19 West Bankside Housing 200‐250 units

Further investigation Further investigation such as a Drainage such as Flow and Impact Assessment (DIA) Pressure test or Water is likely to be required to Impact Assessment is establish what impact, if likely to be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 230644 654887 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS20 land to the south Housing ‐ 100 units of West Kilbride Road (B780) and Further investigation south west of such as a Drainage Kittyshaw Road, Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) Dalry such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 228208 649153 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS21 Land to the south Housing 20‐25 units of the B714 (opposite Trinity Drive)and to the west of A737 Kilwinning Road, Camphill WTW has Stevenson PFI has sufficient Dalry 228847 648701 sufficient capacity. No known issues capacity for development. No known issues. CFS22 Grahamston Housing. 90 units already in Avenue, Housing Land Audit ‐ NA Glengarnock 0512 & 0537 Further investigation Further investigation such as a Drainage such as Flow and Impact Assessment (DIA) Pressure test is likely to is likely to be required to be required to establish what impact, if establish what impact, any this development has if any this on the existing network. development has on Early engagement with the existing network. SW via the Pre‐ Early engagement with Development Enquiry SW via the Pre‐ process is strongly Development Enquiry recommended. Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 231540 653183 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS23 Former ICI Housing 20 units Please note there is a NylonSalts Plant Bradan WTW has Stevenson PFI has sufficient Combined sewer within Carpark 227496 641335 sufficient capacity. No known issues capacity for development. site. CFS24 Land at Sorbie Housing 500 units Farm, Sharphill Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 224682 643670 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS25 Site to the south Housing 12‐15 units east of Woodlea There is currently Early engagement with Cottage, sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Project will be required in 204342 625400 the future. CFS26A Area 1 Whitehirst Housing 140 units Kilwinning

Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Bradan WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 229011 644193 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS26B Area 2 Whitehirst Housing 35 units Kilwinning Bradan WTW has Stevenson PFI has sufficient 228802 643994 sufficient capacity. No known issues capacity for development. No known issues CFS27 Site To West Of Mixed Use Dalry Road, Housing/Retail/Leisure Chapelhill, Ardrossan Further investigation Please note there is a such as a Drainage 315mm Trunk main Impact Assessment (DIA) within site. Further is likely to be required to investigation such as establish what impact, if Flow and Pressure test any this development has is likely to be required on the existing network. to establish what Early engagement with impact, if any this SW via the Pre‐ development has on Development Enquiry the existing network. process is strongly Early engagement with recommended. SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 223210 644282 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS28 Site to the east of Retail unit (Bike hire) & Café Craiglea Court There is currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Brodick Septic tank has Project will be required in sufficient capacity for 201809 635939 the future. development. CFS29 Ormidale South Tourism/Residential ‐ tourist accommodation There is currently (glamping/self catering sufficient capacity at units) & staff Balmichael WTW however accommodation there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Brodick Septic tank has Project will be required in sufficient capacity for 201162 635656 the future. development. CFS31 Ormidale Hotel Expansion of hotel business ‐ annexe/chalets/staff There is currently accommodation sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Brodick Septic tank has Project may be required in sufficient capacity for 201119 635758 the future. development. CFS32 Site to the south of Housing ‐ 1 unit Craiglea Court There is currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Brodick Septic tank has Please note there is a Project may be required in sufficient capacity for Combined sewer running 201773 635914 the future. development. through site CFS33 north kiscadale Housing ‐ 75 units There is currently Early engagement with sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Project may be required in 204369 626861 the future. CFS34 knockankelly Housing ‐ 70 units There is currently Early engagement with sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Project may be required in 204303 627311 the future. CFS35 Land to the west of Housing ‐ 100‐150 units Wingfaulds Avenue/Fairlie Please note 12" Trunk Moor Road, Dalry main and 150mm water main within site.Further investigation such as Early engagement with Flow and Pressure test Scottish Water is is likely to be required recommended to discuss to establish what build out rates and to impact, if any this establish any potential development has on investment at the WWTW the existing network. Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly 228012 649715 sufficient capacity. recommended CFS36 Rockfield There is currently Early engagement with sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Project may be required in 189326 628525 Housing ‐ 16+ units the future. CFS37 Burnside There is currently Early engagement with sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Project will be required in 189778 628429 Housing ‐ 26+ units the future. CFS38 Seafield There is currently Early engagement with sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth Please note there is a investment at the WWTW Project will be required in 3"UPVC main with 189802 627991 Housing 22+ units the future. North edge of site CFS39 Dippin Road, Mayfield Farm, There is currently Early engagement with KA27 8RN sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Housing (self build plots) 15 Project will be required in 189329 628531 units the future. CFS40 Blairbeg There is currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Lamlash Septic tank has Project will be required in sufficient capacity for 202911 631710 1 House the future. development. CFS41 Merkland Bridge site The nearest public water mains over 1 km away. The Developer would be responsible to lay the water mains Please note the site for the site. If this was outwith water zone and to go ahead we would further investgation is consider this required to determine development as part of how this can be the Growth required at Please note this site is 202259 638393 Housing ‐ 10 units accommodated Balmichael WTW. outwith waste water zone CFS42 Mount Pleasant Farm and Cottage There is currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Lamlash Septic tank has Project will be required in sufficient capacity for 203934 632261 Housing ‐ 2 or more the future. development. CFS43 Land to the north Housing ‐ 100‐125 of Willowyards Road/West of Morrishill Drive, Beith

Please note there is Existing sewers within south boundary of site. Further investigation Further investigation such as Flow and such as a Drainage Pressure test is likely to Impact Assessment (DIA) be required to is likely to be required to establish what impact, establish what impact, if if any this any this development has development has on on the existing network. the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry process is strongly Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient recommended. 233948 653489 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS44 land to the south Housing/Community Green of Kilbirnie Place Space. 100‐125 units & Golf Course/West potential phase 2 40‐50 of Newhouse units Further investigation Drive, Beith Further investigation such as a Drainage such as Flow and Impact Assessment (DIA) Pressure test or Water is likely to be required to Impact Assessment is establish what impact, if likely to be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 230873 653591 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity CFS45 Land at Carsehead Housing, retail or Leisure Foundry, Dalry

Please note there is 4" water main running through site. Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure test Early engagement with is likely to be required Scottish Water is to establish what recommended to discuss impact, if any this build out rates and to development has on establish any potential the existing network. investment at the WWTW Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry process is strongly Camphill WTW has recommended 230222 649719 sufficient capacity. CFS46 Southview, Housing 4‐5 units Shiskine, Isle of There is currently Arran. sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Please note there is a Project will be required in 110mm HPPE water Please note this site is 191033 629617 the future. main within site outwith waste water zone CFS47 Greenfield, Torbeg, Housing 10‐12 units Isle of Arran. There is currently Early engagement with sufficient capacity at Scottish Water is Balmichael WTW however recommended to discuss there is substantial growth build out rates and to included in the 'call for establish any potential sites' and a Growth investment at the WWTW Project will be required in 189458 628718 the future. CFS48 Brisbane Glen Road Housing ‐ 86 units including ifrastructure, greenspace, landscaping etc & carpark Further investigation tto allow easier access to such as a Drainage Meridian Pillars & Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) conservatory such as Flow and Early engagement with is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to Scottish Water is establish what impact, if be required to recommended to discuss any this development has establish what impact, build out rates and to on the existing network. if any this establish any potential Early engagement with development has on investment at the WWTW SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry WTW has process is strongly 220932 661577 sufficient capacity. recommended CFS49 West Bankside Housing ‐ 200‐250 units Farm Further investigation Further investigation such as a Drainage such as Flow and Impact Assessment (DIA) Pressure test is likely to is likely to be required to be required to establish what impact, if establish what impact, any this development has if any this on the existing network. development has on Early engagement with the existing network. SW via the Pre‐ Early engagement with Development Enquiry SW via the Pre‐ process is strongly Development Enquiry recommended. Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 230816 654864 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS50 Laigh Letter Housing ‐ 2 units There is currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Project will be required in Lamlash Septic tank has the future. sufficient capacity for 202413 631088 development. CFS51 Mayfield Farm Housing ‐ 300 units

Please note there is a Further investigation 12" Trunk main such as a Drainage running through Impact Assessment (DIA) middle of site. Further is likely to be required to investigation such as establish what impact, if Flow and Pressure test any this development has is likely to be required on the existing network. to establish what Early engagement with impact, if any this SW via the Pre‐ development has on Development Enquiry the existing network. process is strongly Early engagement with recommended. SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 225542 642435 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS52 Land at Housing Meadowside, Beith Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure test is likely to be required to establish what impact, if any this development has on the existing network. Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Please note there is a Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient Combined sewer around sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. site boundary. CFS53 Fereneze Lodge 1 house Lochranza WTW has Please note this site is sufficient capacity No known issues outwith waste water zone CFS54 Land at Ardmhor Housing There is currently sufficient capacity at Early engagement with Balmichael WTW however Scottish Water is there is substantial growth recommended to discuss included in the 'call for build out rates and to sites' and a Growth establish any potential Project will be required in investment at the WWTW the future. 204850 624743 No known issues CFS55 Birchgrove 1 house There is currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Project will be required in Please note this site is the future. 203080 629693 No known issues outwith waste water zone CFS56 Site To North Of Housing ‐ approx 35 units The Orchards, Law Stevenson WwTW has Please note there is a Brae, West Kilbride Camphill WTW has sufficient capacity for Combined sewer were 220969 648581 sufficient capacity. No known issues development. within south side of site CFS57 Site To South Of 5 houses, flood amelioration Lawoodhead, and Equestrian/commercial Springside, West development Camphill WTW has Stevenson PFI has sufficient Kilbride 221377 648792 sufficient capacity. No known issues capacity for development. CFS58 Former Farmfield Housing ‐ 280 units Farm Site, North Of Ardrossan High Road, West Further investigation Kilbride such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 221296 647988 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS59 Tournament Park, Mixed use ‐ Kilwinning Road, Residential/Commercial Irvine Leisure, retail, hotel, restaurant etc. Further investigation Please note there is a such as a Drainage 33" Trunk main Impact Assessment (DIA) running along North is likely to be required to edge of site. Further establish what impact, if investigation such as any this development has Flow and Pressure test on the existing network. is likely to be required Early engagement with to establish what SW via the Pre‐ impact, if any this Development Enquiry development has on process is strongly the existing network. recommended. Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Meadowhead PFI has Bradan WTW has process is strongly sufficient capacity for 231899 641560 sufficient capacity. recommended development. CFS60 Newton Shore, Housing Lochranza A Flow and Pressure test may be required depending on how Lochranza WTW has many housing units are 193235 651296 sufficient capacity allocated for this site. No WwTW within area. CFS61 Ross Road Field Caravan site ‐ 24‐30 pitches There is currently and toilet/washing facilities sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth Please note there is a included in the 'call for 200mm water main Please note Lamlash WwTW sites' and a Growth running along edge of has sufficient capacity but is Project will be required in site just outwith is 400 meters away from this the future. 201458 629966 boundary site. CFS62 Land to the east of Housing Hallmark Hotel

Please note there is a 10" water main just Please note there are within south edge of Existing sewers within site. site including waste Further investigation water pumping station. such as Flow and Further investigation Pressure test is likely to such as a Drainage be required to Impact Assessment (DIA) establish what impact, is likely to be required to if any this establish what impact, if development has on any this development has the existing network. on the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Meadowhead PFI has Development Enquiry Bradan WTW has process is strongly sufficient capacity for process is strongly 233258 638532 sufficient capacity. recommended development. recommended. CFS63 Underbank, Housing ‐25 units There is currently sufficient Southannan Estate, capacity at Fairlie WwTW Fairlie however if all developments go ahead that are included in the 'call for sites' then a Growth Project will be Greenock WTW has required in the future. 220772 653677 sufficient capacity. No known issues CFS64 Upper Chapelton, Housing ‐ 60 units Seamill

Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to establish what impact, if be required to any this development has establish what impact, on the existing network. if any this Early engagement with development has on SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient 220584 646938 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS65 Portencross Road Housing & potential school site

Further investigation Further investigation such as Flow and such as a Drainage Pressure test is likely to Impact Assessment (DIA) be required to is likely to be required to establish what impact, establish what impact, if if any this any this development has development has on on the existing network. the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry process is strongly process is strongly recommended. recommended Please note there are Camphill WTW has Existing water mains Stevenson PFI has sufficient 219888 648481 sufficient capacity. around site boundary capacity for development. CFS66 Main Road, Fairlie Housing There is currently sufficient capacity at Fairlie WwTW however if all developments A Flow and Pressure go ahead that are included in test may be required the 'call for sites' then a depending on how Growth Project will be Greenock WTW has many housing units are required in the future. 220990 656329 sufficient capacity. allocated for this site. CFS67 Shore Lodge and Housing 10 units There is currently Walled Garden sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Brodick Septic tank has Project will be required in sufficient capacity for the future. 201353 637697 development. CFS68 National Offshore Offshore wind turbine test Wind Turbine Test facility Facility Camphill WTW has 218534 653055 sufficient capacity. No known issues No WwTw within area CFS69 WHM Nethermains Retain Housing allocation Road, Kilwinning RES2(10) ‐ 100 units

Please note there is a Combined sewer within site. Further investigation Further investigation such as Flow and such as a Drainage Pressure test is likely to Impact Assessment (DIA) be required to is likely to be required to establish what impact, establish what impact, if if any this any this development has development has on on the existing network. the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry process is strongly Bradan WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient recommended. 230496 642482 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development CFS70 Ardeer Peninsula Housing ‐ 2000+ units and Combined Heat & Power energy station. Please note this Site is near our existing WwTW & has existing sewers Please note there is a within site. 15" Trunk main along Further investigation edge of site. A Water such as a Drainage Impact Assessment will Impact Assessment (DIA) be required to is likely to be required to establish what impact, establish what impact, if if any this any this development has development has on on the existing network. the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry process is strongly Bradan WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient recommended. 229737 639936 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity for development. CFS71 Land at the String, Potential eduction/ty uses There is currently Shiskine sufficient capacity at Early engagement with Balmichael WTW however Scottish Water is there is substantial growth recommended to discuss included in the 'call for build out rates and to Please note there is a sites' and a Growth establish any potential 160mm HPPE water Project will be required in investment at the WWTW main along East edge the future. 191264 630033 of site. CFS72 West of alisa 1 house There is currently cottage sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW however there is substantial growth included in the 'call for sites' and a Growth Project will be required in Please note this site is the future. 196633 620999 outwith waste water zone CFS73 Chapelton Housing 90 Shorefield, Seamill

Please note this site is adjacent to West Kilbride WWPS and suitable stand off distances will be Further investigation required. Further such as Flow and investigation such as a Pressure test is likely to Drainage Impact be required to Assessment (DIA) is likely establish what impact, to be required to if any this establish what impact, if development has on any this development has the existing network. on the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Development Enquiry Camphill WTW has process is strongly Stevenson PFI has sufficient process is strongly 220485 646260 sufficient capacity. recommended capacity development recommended. CFS74 Noddsdale Housing 80 Meadow

Further investigation such as a Drainage Further investigation Impact Assessment (DIA) such as Flow and Early engagement with is likely to be required to Pressure test is likely to Scottish Water is establish what impact, if be required to recommended to discuss any this development has establish what impact, build out rates and to on the existing network. if any this establish any potential Early engagement with development has on investment at the WWTW SW via the Pre‐ the existing network. Development Enquiry Early engagement with process is strongly SW via the Pre‐ recommended. Development Enquiry Greenock WTW has process is strongly 220831 661200 sufficient capacity. recommended CFS75 North of 122 Dalry Housing 15 units & play area Road, Ardrossan Please note that this site is adjacent to an abandoned Scottish Water reservoir however this shouldn’t Camphill WTW has pose any issue to the Stevenson PFI has sufficient 223601 644308 sufficient capacity. development capacity. CFS76 Meadowfoot, Housing 5 units Ardrossan High Rd, Please note there is West Kilbride Camphill WTW has Stevenson PFI has sufficient Combined sewer within 221021 647720 sufficient capacity. No known issues capacity. east edge of site CFS77 Former Ayrshire Enlargement of RES 2 (7) Metal Products site allocated site. Further investigation such as a Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) is likely to be required to establish what impact, if any this development has on the existing network. Early engagement with A Flow and Pressure SW via the Pre‐ test may be required Development Enquiry depending on how Meadowhead PFI has process is strongly Bradan WTW has many housing units are sufficient capacity for recommended. 231354 638922 sufficient capacity. allocated for this site. development. CFS80 Hunterston A Development associated with decommissioning of nuclear power station etc A Flow and Pressure test may be required depending on how Camphill WTW has many housing units are Please note this site is 218128 651490 sufficient capacity. allocated for this site. outwith waste water zone CFS81 Irvine Harbourside Housing/Tourism ‐ Hotel, Commercial ‐ offices/café/restaurant/retai l & health/leisure uses

Please note there are Existing water mains Please note there is within site. Further Existing sewers within investigation such as site. Further investigation Flow and Pressure test such as a Drainage is likely to be required Impact Assessment (DIA) to establish what is likely to be required to impact, if any this establish what impact, if development has on any this development has the existing network. on the existing network. Early engagement with Early engagement with SW via the Pre‐ SW via the Pre‐ Development Enquiry Meadowhead PFI has Development Enquiry Bradan WTW has process is strongly sufficient capacity for process is strongly 230779 638142 sufficient capacity. recommended development. recommended. CFS82 Lynnholm Farm Housing A Flow and Pressure test may be required depending on how Please note there are Camphill WTW has many housing units are Stevenson PFI has sufficient Existing combined sewers 229218 648653 sufficient capacity. allocated for this site. capacity for development. within site. 1. GREEN: The site is in a marketable location identified as being attractive to prospective developers and the proponent is known to have the capability to develop the site and deliver housing units within the plan period. 2. AMBER: We have concerns about: the location, because the wider area is not considered marketable, and/or the developer, because they do not have a track record or known capacity in North Ayrshire; or we have concerns about: the location, because the wider area is not considered marketable, and/or the delivery, because of the lack of established developer interest. 3. RED: The site is not within a location identified as being marketable and no evidence has been submitted to suggest that the proposal is being promoted by a party that is capable of developing the site within the plan period. 4. BLUE: The site generally does not fit with the above methodology and requires a unique assessment or other outcome.

Is the site clear of Is there a Quantity Part 3 Part 3 Part 4 Part 4 existing viable Estimated Who is Estimated NA Site Developmen of new Measu Capacity Capacity Drainage Water infrastruct surface Who is Site name Site address Easting Northing Land use Waste Water Treatment Works Water Treatment works delivery date for delivering delivery date for Comments Catatgory reference t Status developm rement Available available Capacity Capacity ure which water delivering DIA? DIA? WIA? WIA? ent (drainage) (water) Available? Available? could solution impact on available ? proposals?

BLUE Field to north of Margareoch CFS02 Whiting Bay 204561 627003 Bid Site Housing 2 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes WHITING BAY SEP 2010 NS050247 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 BLUE Site to East of Sharpill CottageCFS03 Saltcoats 225508 643530 Bid Site Housing 4 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 WATER ‐ If non‐domestic water demand is high further investigation is likely to be required. BLUE Area A, land adj to Chivas BrotCFS04 Beith 237676 652650 Bid Site Industrial 50,000 sq m Yes Yes Yes Yes CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 WASTE ‐ Site outwith WWTW zone ‐ 1200m away from Barrmill STW. WATER ‐ If non‐domestic water demand is high further investigation is likely to be required. BLUE Area B, land adj to Chivas BrotCFS05 Beith 237755 651756 Bid Site Industrial 50,000 sq m Yes Yes Yes Yes CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 WASTE ‐ Site outwith WWTW zone ‐ 1200m away from Barrmill STW. WASTE ‐ Barrmill WWTW will require a Growth Project to deliver additional capacity. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Water main and sewer in road running through site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to accommodate the site. AMBER Barrmill Community and ResidCFS06 Barrmill 236493 651560 Bid Site Housing and 45 dwelling No Yes No Yes No Yes BARRMILL WWTW NS368513 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Water main running around west and south boundary of site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to GREEN Old Toll House, Lochilbo RoadCFS07 Irvine 234574 641278 Bid Site Housing 100 dwelling No No Yes Yes No Yes MEADOWHEAD PFI WWTW NS338358 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 SW 2018 SW 2018 accommodate the site. SITE SUBMITTED AT MIR STAGE WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if New Old Toll House, Lochilbo RoadCFS07A Irvine 234403 641317 Bid Site Housing 43 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes MEADOWHEAD PFI WWTW NS338358 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 SW 2018 SW 2018 any, this development has on the existing water network. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if AMBER Chapelton Road CFS08 West Kilbride 220707 647238 Bid Site Housing 120 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 any, this development has on the existing water network. More information required on the number of houses before an assessment on network capacity can be made. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Water mains are within the roads to the north, east and running through the site. Scottish Water should be contacted whether there will BLUE Portencross Road CFS09 West Kilbride 219816 648363 Bid Site eco housing ? dwellingDon’t know Don’t know Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 be any impact on the site. WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. WASTE ‐ Whiting Bay ST has limited capacity, but this small development should BLUE Site to South of Glenbrook CFS10 Whiting Bay 204251 625404 Bid Site Housing 4 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes WHITING BAY SEP 2010 NS050247 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 be able to connect.

WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure test is likely to be required to establish what impact, if any this development has on the existing network. WASTE ‐ Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA) is likely to be required to establish what impact, if any this development has on the existing network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There are 2 x 15" trunk mains, a 9"water main running through site and existing combined sewers within site. SW should be contacted to find out whether there will be implications on how the site can be laid out or BLUE Kerelaw CFS14/NA11 Stevenston 226680 642643 Plan Allocatio Housing 80 dwelling No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 whether some assets can be diverted. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if GREEN Wood Farm, Dalry Road CFS15 Kilwinning 229988 644394 Bid Site Housing 173 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 SW ON HOLD any, this development has on the existing water network. This site appears to only be big enough for 1hu. WASTE ‐ The nearest public sewer is Carsehead Bridge ST, which is over 700m BLUE Gap Site at Highfield Village (oCFS17 Dalry 230880 650127 Bid Site Housing ? dwellings Yes Yes Yes CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 away, so private treatment is the most likely option here. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if BLUE West Bankside CFS19 Kilbirnie 230644 654887 Bid Site Housing ? dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Existing combined within site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to accommodate AMBER Former ICI Nylon Salts Plant caCFS23 Stevenston 227496 641335 Bid Site Housing 20 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes No Don’t know STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 the site. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. AMBER Land at Sorbie Farm, SharphillCFS24/NA11 Saltcoats 224682 643670 Plan Allocatio Housing 500 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 SW 2018 WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Water main within road on SW boundary of site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to accommodate AMBER Area 1 Whitehirst CFS26A Kilwinning 229011 644193 Bid Site Housing 140 dwelling No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 SW ON HOLD the site. AMBER Area 2 Whitehirst CFS26B Kilwinning 228802 643994 Bid Site Housing 35 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 According to initial assessments this site is ready to go.

WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 315mm trunk main within site ‐ SW should be AMBER Site to West of Dalry Road, ChCFS27 Ardrossan 223210 644282 Bid Site housing/reta ? mixed No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 SW 2018 contacted to find out whether it will have implications on the layout of the site.

WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Natural water pipe running through length of site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to deliver it all. BLUE Site to the east of Craiglea Co CFS28 Brodick 201809 635939 Bid Site retail ‐ bike h ? Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required to deliver it all. BLUE Ormidale South CFS29 Brodick 201162 635656 Bid Site tourist accom ? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required to deliver it all. BLUE Ormidale Hotel CFS31 Brodick 201119 635758 Bid Site hotel expans ? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future.

ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a public sewer as well as a private water supply pipe crossing the site. SW should be contacted to discuss if the public sewer will have any impact. The owner of the private supply pipe should also be contacted by the developer. BLUE Site to the south of Craiglea C CFS32 Brodick 201775 635912 Bid Site Housing 1 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. BLUE Blairbeg CFS40 Lamlash 202911 631710 Bid Site Housing 1 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. BLUE Mount Pleasant Farm and CotCFS42 Lamlash 203934 632261 Bid Site Housing 2 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There are existing sewers and a surface wter pipe within this site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are AMBER Land to the north of WillowyaCFS43 Beith 233948 653489 Bid Site Housing 125 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 required to accommodate the site. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if AMBER Land to the south of Kilbirnie CFS44 Kilbirnie 230873 653591 Bid Site Housing 175 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 any, this development has on the existing water network.

WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. Largs WWTW will AMBER Brisbane Glen Road CFS48 Largs 220932 661577 Bid Site Housing 86 dwelling No No No Yes Yes Yes LARGS WWTW NS194624 GREENOCK WTW 1994 NS270748 require a Growth Project to deliver additional capacity. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if BLUE West Bankside Farm CFS49 Kilbirnie 230816 654864 Bid Site Housing 250 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 any, this development has on the existing water network. BLUE Laigh Letter CFS50 Lamlash 202413 631088 Bid Site Housing 2 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 SW are already in discussions with the developer and are conducting internal water and wastewater Network Impact Assessments to identify what mitigation is required. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 12" trunk main running through this site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether it will have implications on the layout GREEN Mayfield Farm CFS51 Saltcoats/Steve 225542 642435 Bid Site Housing 300 dwelling No No Yes Yes No Don’t know STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 SW 2018 of the site. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a combined sewer around the site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to AMBER Land at Meadowside CFS52 Beith 234414 653759 Bid Site Housing ? dwelling Yes No Yes Yes No Don’t know STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 accommodate the site. WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. WASTE ‐ This site is approx. 400m away from the Lamlash ST public sewer network, so this may make a connection unviable. A pumping sewer is located along the shore infront of the property but a connection would not be BLUE Fereneze Lodge CFS53 Lamlash 204215 632283 Bid Site Housing 1 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 permitted. Private treatment may need to be considered.

WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required to deliver it all. WASTE ‐ Limited capacity at Whiting Bay ST and development size unknown. AMBER Land at Armhor CFS54 Whiting Bay 204850 624743 Bid Site Housing ? dwelling Yes Yes Don’t know Yes Yes Yes WHITING BAY SEP 2010 NS050247 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. WASTE ‐ This site is outwith the public sewer network and will need to look at BLUE Birchgrove CFS55 Lamlash 203080 629693 Bid Site Housing 1 dwellings Yes Yes Yes BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 private treatment. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ A combined sewer runs across the SW corner of the site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether asset diversions are required to AMBER Site to North of the Orchards, CFS56 West Kilbride 220969 648581 Bid Site Housing 35 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 accommodate the site. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if AMBER Former Farmfield Farm Site, NCFS58/NA11 West Kilbride 221296 647988 Plan Allocatio Housing 280 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 any, this development has on the existing water network.

WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 33" trunk main running along the north boundary of the site, as well as some smaller pipes within the site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether the trunk main will have implications on the BLUE Tournament Park, Kilwinning CFS59/NA10 Irvine 231899 641560 Plan Allocatio Residential/C ? Mixed No No Yes Yes No Yes MEADOWHEAD PFI WWTW NS338358 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 SW 2018 layout of the site or if diversions are required for the smaller pipes.

WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test may be required depending on how many housing units are allocated for this site. WASTE ‐ This site is outwith our wastewater network. Lochranza ST is over 1200m away so will likely not be an economically viable solution. Also, capacity is limited and a growth project would be required to deliver additional capacity. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ A water main runs along the west boundary of this site ‐ SW AMBER Newton Shore, Lochranza CFS60 Lochranza 193235 651296 Bid Site Housing ? No Yes No Yes LOCHRANZA WTW NR943499 should be contacted to find out whether a diversion is required.

WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required to deliver it all. WASTE ‐ Lamlash WWTW has sufficient capacity but is over 400m from site so may not be an economically viable solution. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ A water main runs along part of the south boundary of this BLUE Ross Road Field CFS61/NA11 Lamlash 201458 629966 Plan Allocatio caravan site ‐ ? Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether a diversion is required. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 10" water main just within the south edge of the site as well as existing sewers and a wastewater pumping station within the site ‐ SW should be contacted to find what implications this could have on the layout BLUE Land to the east of Hallmark HCFS62 Irvine 233258 638532 Bid Site Housing ? No No Yes Yes No Yes MEADOWHEAD PFI WWTW NS338358 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 SW 2018 of the site.

WASTE ‐ There is currently sufficient capacity at Fairlie WWTW, however if all proposed developments go ahead a growth project will be required in the future. The site is approximately 375m from the public wastewater network. AMBER Underbank, Southannan EstatCFS63 Fairlie 220772 653677 Bid Site Housing 25 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes FAIRLIE WWTW 1998 NS207559 GREENOCK WTW 1994 NS270748 WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if AMBER Upper Chapelton, Seamill CFS64 West Kilbride 220584 646938 Bid Site Housing 60 dwelling No No Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 any, this development has on the existing water network. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ Both the North and South site have various water mains and sewers along the majority of their boundaries ‐ SW should be contacted to find AMBER Portencross Road CFS65 West Kilbride 219888 648481 Bid Site Housing and ? No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 out whether any diversions are required. WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test may be required depending on how many housing units are allocated for this site. WASTE ‐ There is currently sufficient capacity at Fairlie WWTW, however if all proposed developments go ahead a growth project will be required in the AMBER Main Road CFS66 Fairlie 220990 656329 Bid Site Housing ? Yes Don’t know Yes Yes Yes Yes FAIRLIE WWTW 1998 NS207559 GREENOCK WTW 1994 NS270748 future. WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be AMBER Shore Lodge and Walled Gard CFS67 Brodick 201353 637697 Bid Site Housing 10 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 required to deliver it all. The details of this site should be sumbitted to SW via the planning application process and an EIA should be submitted if required. This will allow an assessment to be undertaken on any potential impact on above and below ground assets. WASTE ‐ There is no public wastewater network in this area. BLUE National Offshore Wind Turbi CFS68 Fairlie 218534 653055 Bid Site National Offshore Wind Turbine Test Facility Yes Yes Yes Yes CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There are existing sewer pipes crossing this site ‐ SW should BLUE WHM Nethermains Road CFS69/NA10 Kilwinning 230496 642482 Plan Allocatio Housing 100 dwelling No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 SW ON HOLD be contacted to find out whether any diversions are required. WATER ‐ A Water Impact Assessment will be required to establish what impact this large development will have on the existing network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact this large development will have on the existing network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ This site covers a large area and there will be a number of SW assets within the site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether there will be any implications on the layout of the site or whether any BLUE Ardeer Peninsula CFS70/NA10 Stevenston 229737 639936 Plan Allocatio 2000+ units a2000+ No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 diversions are required.

WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required to deliver it all. WASTE ‐ Site outwith WWTW zone. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 160mm HPPE water main along the east boundary BLUE Land at the String, Shiskine CFS71 Shiskine 191264 630033 Bid Site Housing & po ? Yes Yes No Yes BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 of this site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether a diversion is required.

WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. The nearest water main is approximately 400m north of this site. There are private supply pipes running to the neighbouring properties but investigations would be required to identify whether there would be sufficient pressure to share a connection, as well as permission being required from the owner. WASTE ‐ This site is outwith the public sewer network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 160mm HPPE water main along the east boundary BLUE West of Ailsa Cottage CFS72 Kilmory 196633 620999 Bid Site Housing 1 dwellings Don’t know Yes Yes BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 of this site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether a diversion is required. WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ This site is adjacent to West Kilbride Pumping Station and suitable stand off distances will be required. There is also a water main running along the road to the east of the site ‐ SW should be contacted to find out AMBER Chapelton Shorefield, Seamill CFS73 West Kilbride 220485 646260 Bid Site Housing 90 dwelling No No Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 whether a diversion is required.

WATER ‐ Further investigation such as Flow and Pressure Test required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. Largs WWTW will require a Growth Project to deliver additional capacity.

Connection points to the existing water and wastewater network will either need to be made across the Noddsdale Water to the east or to the south, near BLUE Noddsdale Meadow CFS74/NA11 Largs 220831 661200 Plan Allocatio Housing 80 dwelling No No No Yes Yes Yes LARGS WWTW NS194624 GREENOCK WTW 1994 NS270748 Noddsdale Meadow. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There are a couple of assets crossing the north west corner of the site. It is a very small area, but SW should be contacted to find out if there AMBER North of 122 Dalry Road CFS75 Ardrossan 223601 644308 Bid Site Housing 15 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 will be any implication on the site. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a water main along the south boundary of the site and a sewer along the east boundary. SW should be contacted to find out AMBER Meadowfoot, Ardrossan High CFS76 West Kilbride 221021 647720 Bid Site Housing 5 dwelling Yes Yes Yes Yes No Don’t know STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 whether this could have an impact on the site. WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test may be required depending on the number of houses proposed. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment required to establish what impact, if any, this development has on the existing water network. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There are several water mains and sewers running along the east and south site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether they BLUE Former Ayrshire Metal ProducCFS77/RES2(Irvine 231354 638922 Plan Allocatio Housing 100 dwelling No Don’t know Yes Yes No Yes MEADOWHEAD PFI WWTW NS338358 BRADAN WTW NX436993 SW 2018 need to be diverted.

WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test may be required depending on what the water demand of this development is. Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required to deliver it all. BLUE Ardlui, Kings Cross CFS78 Whiting Bay 204500 628472 Bid Site Camping, ho ? dwellings Don’t know Yes Yes Yes BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 WASTE ‐ No public sewer in the area. WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test may be required depending on what the water demand of this development is. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. BLUE Hunterston A CFS80 West Kilbride 218128 651490 Bid Site Developmen ? Don’t know Yes Yes Yes CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 WASTE ‐ No public sewer in the area.

WATER ‐ A development of this size will require a Water Impact Assessment. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. WASTE ‐ A development of this size will require a Drainage Impact Assessment. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There are several water mains and sewers within the site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether they will have an BLUE Irvine Harbourside CFS81/NA11 Irvine 230779 638142 Plan Allocatio Housing/Tou ? Mixed No No Yes Yes No Yes MEADOWHEAD PFI WWTW NS338358 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 SW 2018 SW 2018 impact on the layout of the site or whether any need to be diverted. WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test or Water Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. WASTE ‐ There is no public sewer network in Burnhouse. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There i a water main running along the east and south site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether they will have an AMBER Burnhouse Manor Farm CFS84 Burnhouse by 238426 650460 Bid Site No details of ? Don’t know Yes No Yes CAMPHILL WTW NS277543 impact on the development.

WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test or Water Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a 12" and 15" trunk main as well as several smaller water mains and sewers crossing this site. ‐ SW should be contacted to find out AMBER Kerelaw Mains Farm CFS85 Stevenston 226532 642622 Bid Site No details of ? Don’t know Don’t know Yes Yes No Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993 whether they will have an impact on the layout of the development.

WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test or Water Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. There may be some difficulty joining to the sewer network due to the B781 and railway line. Alternatively a connection could be made approximately 600m south of the site. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW to discuss the options available. AMBER Springside Nursery, LawoodheCFS86 West Kilbride 221154 649119 Bid Site No details of ? Don’t know Don’t know Yes Yes Yes Yes STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 CAMPHILL WTW NS277543

WATER ‐ A Flow and Pressure Test or Water Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. WASTE ‐ A Drainage Impact Assessment may be required depending on the size of the development here. We would advise early engagement between the developer and SW. ASSET CONFLICT ‐ There is a sewer running along the south site boundary ‐ SW should be contacted to find out whether a diversion is required. AMBER Longford Avenue CFS89/NA11 Kilwinning 230264 642415 Plan Allocatio Housing ? Don’t know Don’t know Yes Yes No Don’t know STEVENSTON PFI WWTW NS275403 BRADAN WTW NX436993

WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. The nearest water main is over 1000m away, so a considerable off‐site extention would be required if this development wished to connect to the public water supply. Depending on the number of houses proposed here a Flow and Pressure Test or WIA may be required. WASTE ‐ Brodick ST is over 1000m away so private treatment would be likely be the preferred option here. New Site adjacent to Merkland BridCFS90 Brodick 202154 638338 Bid Site Housing ? dwellings Don’t know Don’t know Yes BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 Once the size of this development is known

A large area of land is allocated for this site. Once the number of houses New Glen Cloy/Auchrannie Road CFS91 Brodick 200584 635687 Bid Site Housing ? dwellingDon’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Yes Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 proposed are known SW will be able to advise on available capacity.

A large area of land is allocated for this site. Once the number of houses proposed are known SW will be able to advise on available capacity. ASSET Conflict ‐ Two water mains cross this site. SW should be contacted to find New Site to the south of Brathwic TCFS92 Brodick 201996 635215 Bid Site Housing ? dwellingDon’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know No Yes BRODICK SEP NS028358 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 out whether diversions are required.

Once the number of houses proposed are known SW will be able to advise on available network capacity. WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. WASTE ‐ Lamlash ST has limited capacity, however the majority of bid sites submitted for the area are for very small developments. Unless the three sites with unknown site density are quite large, there shoudn't be an issue. ASSET Conflict ‐ Two water mains cross this site. SW should be contacted to find New Site to the west of Benlister TeCFS93 Lamlash 202042 630931 Bid Site Housing ? dwellingDon’t know Don’t know Yes Yes No Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 out whether diversions are required.

Once the number of houses proposed are known SW will be able to advise on available network capacity. WATER ‐ Currently sufficient capacity at Balmichael WTW, however there is substantial growth included in the "call for Sites" and a Growth Project will be required in the future. WASTE ‐ Lamlash ST has limited capacity, however the majority of bid sites submitted for the area are for very small developments. Unless the three sites with unknown site density are quite large, there shoudn't be an issue. ASSET Conflict ‐ Two water mains cross this site. SW should be contacted to find New Ross Road near Dyemill CFS94 Lamlash 201414 629855 Bid Site Housing ? dwellingDon’t know Don’t know Yes Yes No Yes LAMLASH SEP NS050329 BALMICHAEL WTW NR927322 out whether diversions are required. REF LOCATION PROPOSED USE TS Initial Comments TS Consultation on development Trunk Road Mitigation/ NAC Protocol

CFS01 The Den Housing - approx 12 units Ribbon Development - site area includes the A737 (T). Concern that development seeking numerous direct access points on this high speed section of trunk road. TS would wlecome information on development specifics and access strategy. Individual accesses with the trunk road will be resisted.

CFS02 Field to north of Margareoch Housing - 2 units (St Margarets) CFS03 Site to East of Sharphil Cottage Housing - 4 units

CFS04 AREA A, LAND ADJACENT TO Industrial - expansion of maturation warehouse site. 20 Major Application requires to be supported by TA. Distant CHIVAS BROTHERS LTD warehouses, floor area 50,000sq.m. & associated from A737, but potential impact on A737 due to infrastructure. development type. CFS05 AREA B, LAND ADJACENT TO Industrial - expansion of maturation warehouse site. 20 Major Application requires to be supported by TA. Distant CHIVAS BTOTHERS LTD warehouses, floor area 50,000sq.m. & associated from A737, but potentia limpact on A737 due to infrastructure. development type. CFS06 Barrmill Community and Residential Development - 45 units as enabling Residential Development development for Community Centre project including market garden, landscaped areas & wind turbine

CFS07 Old Toll House, Lochlibo Housing - 100 units None Rd,Irvine CFS08 Chapelton Road Housing - 120 units CFS14 Kerelaw, Stevenston Housing - 80 units on allocated RES2 site May require to contribute to Development Protocol for Pennyburn Roundabout. CFS15 Wood Farm, Dalry Road, Housing - 173 units Major Application requires to be supported by TA. TS consulted previously on development Kilwinning Adjacent to the A737, with potential to impact on A737 opposite the site. due to scale and potential new access with the trunk road outwith the 30mph speed limit. CFS16 N-W part of N-W field at Housing or Mixed Use No details of scale of development, but existing trunk road Highfield Farm junction would not support large scale housing or mixed use. A junction with trunk road would not be supported.

CFS17 Gap Site at Highfield Village Housing (on C99 road) CFS18 Bridgend, Dalry Housing CFS19 West Bankside Housing 200-250 units CFS20 land to the south of West Housing - 100 units Kilbride Road (B780) and south west of Kittyshaw Road, Dalry

CFS21 Land to the south of the B714 Housing 20-25 units (opposite Trinity Drive)and to the west of A737 Kilwinning Road, Dalry CFS22 Grahamston Avenue, Housing. 90 units already in Housing Land Audit - NA 0512 Glengarnock & 0537 CFS23 Former ICI NylonSalts Plant Housing 20 units Carpark CFS24 Land at Sorbie Farm, Sharphill Housing 500 units Major Application requires to be supported by TA. TS consulted on adjacent site planning This development should contribute to Adjacent to trunk road, but no direct access would be application for 300 houses and mixed the NAC protocol for Pennyburm permitted. Potential impact on A78 junctions due to scale employment. Roundabout. of development. CFS25 Site to the south east of Housing 12-15 units Woodlea Cottage, CFS26A Area 1 Whitehirst Kilwinning Housing 140 units

CFS26B Area 2 Whitehirst Kilwinning Housing 35 units

CFS27 Site To West Of Dalry Road, Mixed Use Housing/Retail/Leisure Site adjacent to A78(T) at the "three towns bypass". Local May require to contribute to Chapelhill, Ardrossan road access available and connection with trunk road from Development Protocol for Pennyburn good standard roundabout junction. Roundabout.

CFS28 Site to the east of Craiglea Retail unit (Bike hire) & Café Court CFS29 Ormidale South Tourism/Residential - tourist accommodation (glamping/self catering units) & staff accommodation

CFS31 Ormidale Hotel Expansion of hotel business - annexe/chalets/staff accommodation CFS32 Site to the south of Craiglea Housing - 1 unit Court CFS33 north kiscadale Housing - 75 units CFS34 knockankelly Housing - 70 units CFS35 Land to the west of Wingfaulds Housing - 100-150 units Avenue/Fairlie Moor Road, Dalry CFS36 Rockfield Housing - 16+ units CFS37 Burnside Housing - 26+ units CFS38 Seafield Housing 22+ units CFS39 Dippin Road, Mayfield Farm, KA27 8RN Housing (self build plots) 15 units CFS40 Blairbeg 1 House CFS41 Merkland Bridge site Housing - 10 units CFS42 Mount Pleasant Farm and Cottage Housing - 2 or more CFS43 Land to the north of Housing - 100-125 Major Development requires to be supported by TA. Willowyards Road/West of Potential for intensification of B777 approach to Morrishill Drive, Beith roundabout junction with A737.

CFS44 land to the south of Kilbirnie Housing/Community Green Space. 100-125 units & Place Golf Course/West of potential phase 2 40-50 units Newhouse Drive, Beith CFS45 Land at Carsehead Foundry, Housing, retail or Leisure No details of scale of development, but existing trunk road Dalry junction would not support large scale housing or retail. CFS46 Southview, Shiskine, Isle of Housing 4-5 units Arran. CFS47 Greenfield, Torbeg, Isle of Housing 10-12 units Arran. CFS48 Brisbane Glen Road Housing - 86 units including ifrastructure, greenspace, landscaping etc & carpark tto allow easier access to Meridian Pillars & conservatory CFS49 West Bankside Farm Housing - 200-250 units CFS50 Laigh Letter Housing - 2 units CFS51 Mayfield Farm Housing - 300 units Large scale housing development, but distant from the may require to contribute to trunk road and the access to the A78(T) is from a good Development Protocol for Pennyburn standard roundabout junction. Roundabout. CFS52 Land at Meadowside, Beith Housing No details of housing numbers, but potential for intensification of trunk road junctions CFS53 Fereneze Lodge 1 house CFS54 Land at Ardmhor Housing CFS55 Birchgrove 1 house CFS56 Site To North Of The Orchards, Housing - approx 35 units Law Brae, West Kilbride

CFS57 Site To South Of Lawoodhead, 5 houses, flood amelioration and Equestrian/commercial No details of scale of commercial development on this Springside, West Kilbride development large site. Further information required.

CFS58 Former Farmfield Farm Site, Housing - 280 units Large scale housing site distant from the trunk road. North Of Ardrossan High Road, Limited route options will, however, result in West Kilbride intensification of traffic using the existing priority junction outwith the 30mph speed limit. Needs to be supported by TA and potential for alternative trunk road junction location. CFS59 Tournament Park, Kilwinning Mixed use - Residential/Commercial Leisure, retail, hotel, No details on scale/ type of development available, but no TS consulted previously on AMH Hospital Road, Irvine restaurant etc. anticipated trunk road issues for standalone site. adjacent to the this site (12/00475/PPPM). Development identified in previous LDP's requiring upgrade to local roundabout,but not to A78 trunk Road.

CFS60 Newton Shore, Lochranza Housing CFS61 Ross Road Field Caravan site - 24-30 pitches and toilet/washing facilities

CFS62 Land to the east of Hallmark Housing No details on scale/ type of development available, but no Hotel anticipated trunk road issues for standalone site.

CFS63 Underbank, Southannan Housing -25 units Small scale development, but will intensify substandard Estate, Fairlie junction on a high speed section of the A78(T).

CFS64 Upper Chapelton, Seamill Housing - 60 units Small scale development but similar issues to CF508. Intensification of existing junction outwith 30mph speed limit. CFS65 Portencross Road Housing & potential school site Scale of development not indicated, but lies adjacent to the A78(T) on two sites. Existing crossroads junction located on the boundary of the site is located outwith the 30mph speed limit. TA would be required to inform impact on the A78(T). New trunk road junction may be acceptable if located within the 30mph speed limit.

CFS66 Main Road, Fairlie Housing No details of scale of development for this constrained Previous TS discussions raised concern No details of site access, but new site, which will require direct access from the A78(T). regarding new direct access with the A78(T). junction onto unrestricted section of A78(T) would not be supported.

CFS67 Shore Lodge and Walled Housing 10 units Garden CFS68 National Offshore Wind Offshore wind turbine test facility No details of scale of development but good access to the Turbine Test Facility A78(T) via a roundabout junction CFS69 WHM Nethermains Road, Retain Housing allocation RES2(10) - 100 units Kilwinning CFS70 Ardeer Peninsula Housing - 2000+ units and Combined Heat & Power energy Major Application that will require to be supported by TA. This site has been identified in previous LDP's This development should contribute to station. Adjacent to A78 with potential for new trunk road access The proposals including a new roundabout on the NAC protocol for Pennyburm and for detrimental impact. the A78(T), was not supported by TS. Roundabout.

CFS71 Land at the String, Shiskine Potential eduction/ty uses CFS72 West of alisa cottage 1 house CFS73 Chapelton Shorefield, Seamill Housing 90 Small scale development, but will intensify substandard junction located outwith the 30mph speed limit.

CFS74 Noddsdale Meadow Housing 80 CFS75 North of 122 Dalry Road, Housing 15 units & play area Boundary with A78(T) Three Towns Bypass. Site does not Ardrossan appear to have potential local road access and may seek connection onto A78(T)/ Dalry Road Roundabout. This would not be supported by TS due to size of roundabout and increase to 5 arms.

CFS76 Meadowfoot, Ardrossan High Housing 5 units Rd, West Kilbride CFS77 Former Ayrshire Metal Enlargement of RES 2 (7) allocated site. No details on scale/ type of development available, but no Products site anticipated trunk road issues for standalone site.

CFS80 Hunterston A Development associated with decommissioning of nuclear No details on scale/ type of development available, but no TS consulted previously regarding deep water Potential for requirement to upgrade power station etc anticipated trunk road issues for standalone site. Access to freight terminal NPF2. Potential for wider the A78()T) to support this the A78(T) via a good standard roundabout junction. impacts due to rural sections of trunk road not development and contribution to the suited for large number off HGV's. Pennyburn Roundabout protocol.

CFS81 Irvine Harbourside Housing/Tourism - Hotel, Commercial - offices/café/restaurant/retail & health/leisure uses CFS82 Lynnholm Farm Housing No details of housing numbers, but appears to be a Major Application that will require to be supported by TA. Adjacent to A737, with potential for new trunk road access and detrimental impact on A737. Fw: NAC/LDP - Call for Sites - Transport Scotland comments - email to NAC - 2nd November 2016 [OFFICIAL] to: LDP 23/11/2016 13:30

Strategic Planning Manager Economy & Communities North Ayrshire Council Cunninghame House, Irvine, KA12 8EE 01294 324686 ----- Forwarded by Legal/North Ayrshire Council on 23/11/2016 13:30 -----

From:

Date: 02/11/2016 09:25 Subject: NAC/LDP - Call for Sites - Transport Scotland comments - email to NAC - 2nd November 2016

thanks very much for providing information on the sites received through the LDP call for sites exercise. We have reviewed the sites and appended the table provided within your email with site specific comments.

More generally, in relation to West Kilbride we would welcome further information as the site selection process moves forward, as currently there could be the potential for significant cumulative impact on the A78(T) as a result of the sites. For your information we would resist proposals for accesses with the trunk road outwith the built up area and on de‐restricted sections.

Additionally, there is the potential for a cumulative impact on Pennyburn roundabout from the sites located within the envelope of the three towns bypass. Should all or some of the sites come forward, there may be the requirement for this to be investigated with cognisance given to the current Pennyburn development protocol.

Significant further discussion and appraisal will be required should the site for 2000+ houses be brought forward at Ardeer. The access strategy and implications for the trunk road network should be discussed from the outset with Transport Scotland. Additionally we would be happy to be involved in future discussions surrounding Hunterston decommissioning (CFS80) and the offshore wind turbine test facility (CFS68).

As you know we would seek to continually engage with the Council as the spatial strategy, and the need for and format of, any transport appraisal develops. We understand from our previous meeting that the Council may not be seeking to allocate significant housing numbers in LDP2, therefore further information on the potential preferred strategy would be beneficial. This would help to inform any future discussions in relation to the nature of an assessment of the potential implications on the trunk road network.

We would be happy to review sites once further sifting has been undertaken by the Council. Please do not hesitate to get in touch should you wish to discuss the comments further or require more detailed information on specific sites.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

***********************

From: LDP [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 05:21 PM To: LDP Subject: Consultation on Call for Sites, Suggested sites for LDP2 [PUBLIC]

We are reviewing our current Local Development Plan (LDP), and moving towards preparation of a replacement plan or ‘LDP2’.

To help us prepare the MIR, we have undertaken a ‘Call for Sites’ exercise to identify sites within North Ayrshire that may have potential for development. We invited landowners, potential developers and the public to suggest sites that may contribute toward North Ayrshire’s future housing, employment, retail, leisure and infrastructural needs during 2019-2029.

We would be grateful if you could provide us with any comments you may have in relation to these suggested sites. Could you please return any comments to us within 28 days.

Should you require any further information, please contact Neale McIlvanney on 01294 324686 or email us at [email protected]

I attach a spreadsheet with details of the sites, together with ArcGIS shapefiles of the site boundaries. If this format is unsuitable, please contact us. Alternatively, the boundaries can be viewed at: http://www.geo.north-ayrshire.gov.uk/Sites/Suggested_LDP2_Sites/

(See attached file: LDP2SuggestedSites.xlsx)(See attached file: LDP2_SuggestedSites.dbf)(See attached file: LDP2_SuggestedSites.shp)(See attached file: LDP2_SuggestedSites.shx)

Development Plans Team North Ayrshire Council Cunninghame House Irvine KA12 8EE 01294 324300 * Please help reduce waste. Don't print this email unless absolutely necessary. **

This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is addressed and is not intended to be relied upon by any person without subsequent written confirmation of its contents. Accordingly, North Ayrshire Council disclaim all responsibility and accept no liability (including in negligence) for the consequences for any person acting, or refraining from acting, on such information prior to the receipt by those persons of subsequent written confirmation.

If you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone. Please also destroy and delete the message from your computer.

Any form of unauthorised reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication of any part of this e-mail message (or attachments transmitted with it) by the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited.

Please be advised that North Ayrshire Council's incoming and outgoing e-mail is subject to regular monitoring.

"This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses and malicious content."

______This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______

*********************************** ********************************

This email has been received from an external party and has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.

******************************************************************** ********************************************************************** This e-mail (and any files or other attachments transmitted with it) is intended solely for the attention of the addressee(s). Unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, copying or distribution of any part of this e-mail is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient please destroy the email, remove any copies from your system and inform the sender immediately by return. Communications with the Scottish Government may be monitored or recorded in order to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful

Page 2 of 4

Direct Dial: Main Office: Website: www.systra.co.uk

https://twitter.com/SYSTRA LTD www.linkedin.com/company/36421

SYSTRA Ltd now incorporates staff from both JMP and SIAS, providing a UK and Ireland team of nearly 500 specialists in transport planning and engineering. For more information, visit www.systra.co.uk

======This message has been scanned for malware. This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential, intended solely for the addressees, and may contain legally privileged information. Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited. E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Neither our company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates shall be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. ======Ce message a ete verifie et ne contient pas de programme malveillant. Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont confidentiels et susceptibles de contenir des informations couvertes par le secret professionnel. Ce message est etabli a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires. Toute utilisation ou diffusion non autorisee est interdite. Tout message electronique est susceptible d'alteration. Notre societe et ses filiales declinent toute responsabilite au titre de ce message s'il a ete altere, deforme falsifie. ======______This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______

*********************************** ********************************

This email has been received from an external party and has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.

********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

This e-mail (and any files or other attachments transmitted with it) is intended solely for the attention of the addressee(s). Unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, copying or distribution of any part of this e-mail is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient please destroy the email, remove any copies from your system and inform the sender immediately by return.

Communications with the Scottish Government may be monitored or recorded in order to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes. The views or opinions contained within this e-mail may not necessarily reflect those of the Scottish Government.

08/2017