ENVIRONMENT AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE: 8 FEBRUARY 2011

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION TO ERECT 6 HOUSES AT CLADDACH KIRKIBOST, NORTH (REF NO 10/00641/PPD)

Report by Director of Development

PURPOSE OF REPORT Since this proposal received more than three letters of representation from separate parties which contain matters which are relevant material planning considerations, the application should not be dealt with under delegated powers and is presented to the Comhairle for a decision.

COMPETENCE 1.1 There are no legal, financial or other constraints to the recommendation being implemented. SUMMARY 2.1 It is proposed to erect 6 affordable houses comprising of three blocks of semi-detached properties. The houses are single storey with white dry dash walls, grey flat modern concrete roof tiles with a 40º roof pitch and white uPVC windows.

2.2 Objections have been received on several grounds including drainage, loss of privacy, overlooking, street lighting and housing density.

2.3 Amended plans were received on the 1 February 2010 and the neighbours have been re-notified and have been given 7 days to submit any further comments on the amended plans. The changes made are not significant but it has resulted in the site boundary changing slightly.

2.4 The site is assessed as complying with the Development Plan and National planning policy. It is considered that the objections can either be dealt with by condition or do not merit refusal of the planning application. Therefore it is recommended that the application be approved, subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION 3.1 It is recommended that the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions shown in Appendix 1 to the Report.

Contact Officer Hannah Morrison Telephone: 01870 602425 Ext 837 Email: [email protected] Appendices 1 Proposed Schedule of Conditions 2 Plans of the Development Background Papers: None

BACKGROUND 4.1 It is proposed to erect six affordable houses comprising of three blocks of semi-detached properties. The houses will be single storey and will have white dry dash walls, white uPVC windows, the roof pitch will be 40° and the roofing materials are grey Marley modern flat concrete roof tiles. Each property will also have a solar panel and will have 2 car parking spaces. In the amended plans the boundary fences at the front of the properties will be 1.1m and to the rear and between the properties 1.8m high. It is proposed to have planting at the north of the site and around the septic tank.

4.2 The planning application site is 5,090 square metres, is bounded to the north by Westford Inn, a grade B Listed Building. The applicants own land to the south of the site that remains undeveloped. There are 7 privately owned houses forming a horse shoe shape round the site and the land owned by the applicant. The site is peat and relatively flat. The site has been identified in the Housing Land Audit, June 2010.

4.3 Amended plans were submitted by the applicant on the 1 February, the changes included fencing round the properties as detailed above. Previously the sewage treatment plant was to be serviced by a road accessed from the north of the site. It is now to have its own access from the south. Details of the sewage treatment and the surface water drainage were also provided as part of the application.

4.3 The application to erect 6 houses at Claddach Kirkibost was received from Uist Builders c/o Reynolds Architecture, 1 Tulloch Street, Dingwall on the 2 December 2010.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Representations have been received from the following:

• Alastair McKay and Elisabeth Jarvis, Westford Inn, Claddach Kirkibost, ; • Revd Donald Strachan, Reul Na Mara, Claddach Kirkibost, North Uist; • Mrs J M S Cairns, The Stables, Claddach Kirkibost, North Uist; • Mr and Mrs W Marshall, Clova House, Claddach Kirkibost, North Uist; • Mr and Mrs Whitehouse, Heaven Scent, Claddach Kirkibost, North Uist; • Mr John Cameron, Willow Cottage, Claddach Kirkibost, North Uist.

5.2 The full terms of the Representations can be read on the file at the Development Department. However, they can be summarised as follows:

• “The ground for this housing is a bog. Although it would be possible to build the houses above the water table, this would still leave the gardens subject to flooding and at least continually damp, which would be a problem if there are children in the houses. Also, the whole dampness of that area could be a problem for the elderly or those with chest problems. I know the difficulty in draining my own ground, and the cost of this! When the cattle were in the park, they were often up to their knees in the wet ground. It is going to be difficult to drain this area sufficiently.” • “Drainage - This land is waterlogged – water collects to our side of the site (Where the huge septic tank has to be located). Will this make this problem worse?” • “The sewage plant may require a discharge although no details have been provided by the applicant. The application should not be determined until a satisfactory solution has been provided. Please note that if the proposal is to discharge into the existing roadside ditch it does not have sufficient capacity. The plans show one manhole in the entire drain line. This is wrong. The plans show a new hardcore road to the treatment plant. Service lorries will need to pass under existing electricity cables. There is insufficient headroom in the area where they cross the track.” • “The applicant intends to gather all water from roofs and hard landscaping and lead it to a soakaway with a discharge to an existing ditch. The approximate areas to be drained are - roofs 750m², parking 270m² and road 870m². Given the relatively high water table in the area the soakaway would appear to be undersized and an unsuitable solution. Furthermore the siting of the soakaway would be directly being and above my own house and will lead to flooding in my garden. The discharge ditch also runs down the side of my property and the capacity of this is governed not by the size of the ditch but by an existing culvert. Flooding at the culvert mouth already occurs and the applicant’s proposal will certainly not improve the situation.” • “The ground is a bog, any disturbance of the land will affect ours and surrounding homes, making them prone to flooding, as our house was built too low we are especially in danger of flooding. The overflow from our septic tank goes into the main drain right through the site, we object to any path’s or pipe work going across it because this will make water back up into our tank. we have enough trouble as it is keeping it working right. We object to any working, pipes and path’s behind us, as this will back up water and our house will flood, because as I said earlier out house was built too low. • “The buildings being considered would be built on an area of marsh ground are likely to increase the run off of water onto the grounds of the Westford (there are existing drainage channels running alongside part of the Westford’s fencing and through the grounds of the Westford which could be compromised with a potential impact on the foundations of the Westford).” • “Drainage issues - our property to the south east of the development is separated by a boggy field which regularly displaces water into our garden as the drainage is inadequate. This is the field across which the sewage pipe will run and the drain into which the SUDS will run-off. Has there been any investigation of the impact of this development on the local water table? If so, what actions will be taken to prevent the exacerbation of the problems we experience? If not, why not? The environmental impact of inadequate drainage and sewage leaking after a flood must be considerable. Advice from SEPA should be integral to any planning approval.” • “On the basis of these representations I have made, I would request the Planning Committee to impose stringent conditions regarding proper drainage of the site, the provision of proper fencing against the danger of the boggy nature of the ground, and to provide proper facilities in respect of convenience shopping and adequate public transport for families with no private transport • “We enjoy an environment of no street lighting and would like this to continue… As keen astronomers we will be severely disadvantaged by light pollution.” • “Could we ask that there be no street lighting or that if there absolutely has to be, that it is subtle low level and designed in such a way that light pollution is kept to an absolute minimum.” • “…the buildings be sited further from the boundary of the Westford. Currently, it seems that the closest of the proposed buildings, forming the bulk of the estate houses being considered, are only around six meters from the Westford Inn boundary and will therefore dominate that aspect of the Westford. A greater distance, further than 10 meters, would start to offset that concern. A recent building (one of those that has been used to set a precedent for construction in the area) is sited only some 20 meters from the Westford boundary, close to the public road, and at that distance does have an impact on the view of the Westford…” • “Should approval be granted for the proposed housing estate may we suggest that the existing stone wall bordering the potential building plot be repaired, as we understand it should have been some time ago and then the stone wall be extended along the boundary with the Westford until it meets the main road. By doing so the delineation would appear more natural and the proposed development would also sit more comfortably in the area, as well as providing greater privacy for any new residents. As it stands the new buildings proposed would be immediately against an area of the grounds that is used as a beer garden and very close to the bar area of the Westford with all the human activity involved in such areas. Such a wall on the other side of the Westford’s boundary fence would also assist in the maintenance of the existing Westford fence which would be problematic without such a wall and a clear demarcation.” • “The prominence of the building (Westford Inn), unobstructed by the building environment and retaining its individual dominant position in the landscape had been planning policy until relatively recently.” • “…The proposed development is sited too close to the boundary fence. The current plans suggest that the proposed buildings are only some six meters from the fence. We would suggest that any development should be further away for the following reasons: 1. There are development trees in the immediate vicinity; 2. the proposed buildings would dominate that aspect of the Westford; 3. Maintenance of the fencing around the Westford’s grounds and clear delineation of property boundaries will be problematic; 4. Privacy of any new residents; 5. The business element of the Westford includes licensed premises with the associated human traffic; 6. The proposed housing estate is adjacent to the beer garden. We already have the business operating plan in place, detailing these areas, and this may not be amended without incurring a fee; 7. The proposed site is by the car park and the area is also used by heavy goods vehicles for deliveries.” • “We had understood that the consultation period was not due to end until early 2011, at which point there would be a further period for residents to make comment on the policies and proposals…It appears that he decision had actually been made to proceed prior to 20 November 2010, as indicated in the planning application. We are unsure as to how this has happed and why, as well as being disappointed that he earlier correspondence was misleading.” • “We do not consider that the development is appropriate. Briefly this is because we consider that there would be better sites to consider than that in Claddach Kirkibost and that the impact on a listed building…” • “We are concerned that the notification and timescale for comments has fallen during the Christmas holiday period. This may have an impact on the ability of those concerned to raise any objections that they may have.” • “We would like to ask that some compromises be made. In brief these are as follows: That the density of the proposed development be reduced. By this we mean that would it be possible to build fewer houses than the six currently proposed. The proposals as they stand are out of keeping with the local built environment where single buildings with an area of land around them are the consistent theme. Such a density of proposed housing is out of keeping with this and in itself would set a precedent if implemented.” • “Without prejudice to the foregoing response which might be accommodated by suitable Planning Conditions, I would wish to point out that the increase of density of housing accommodation from 7 to 13 residential units within the immediate location of this site is inappropriate and detrimental to the character of the existing settlement.” • “There area of the developed site appears to measure 0.3ha or thereby. The proposal is to house 27 people within this area and must be regarded as overdevelopment of the site.” • “Loss of Character – A development on this scale will spoil the immediate area. It is too dense compared with the surrounding properties and will create a poor visual impression. The concentration of 27 people on such a small site will overwhelm local social cohesion and infrastructure. This will irrevocable change the character of the area.” • “We were also informed that the development would have 100% social housing even although the Government only asks for a much smaller percentage to be built. Why is this? When asked if there would be more houses built on this site the company refused to deny this.” • “The semi detached nature of the proposed houses is not in keeping with other properties in the area. The submitted plans are also incorrect. The planned 4 bed/6person house actually has 5 bedrooms.” • “There is no architectural merit in any of the designs. Very little effort has been made to produce good looking individual homes. These unsympathetic buildings will be adjacent to the Westford Inn which is a listed building” • “Claddach Kirkibost is currently home to middle aged and elderly residents. The proposal has the potential to introduce 15 children into the area and will create a noise nuisance.” • “The area being considered is near the cellar cooling unit and the associated noise generated by such equipment.” • “There will be a loss of privacy and view” • “The new properties sitting above our house will be overshadowed by the proposal.” • The quiet nature of the area in question provides natural hunting ground for short eared owls, hen harriers and other raptors and nesting sites for snipe, water rail, skylarks and corncrakes. The proposal should be seen as being harmful to this environment. The site is also used by wildlife as a corridor to the sea shore • “The development has no amenities and is 3 miles in any direction from shops, petrol pumps and a post office. The occupants of the houses will be heavily reliant on their own transport negating any claimed benefits of sustainability or green measures.” • “To use the existing covered bus stop provided by the Comhairle, children will have to walk approximately 200m along the main A865 single track road with no pavement.” • “Inadequate consideration of social impact- given that there are other communities in the vicinity that could easily absorb a development of this size and provide more amenity for prospective tenants why was Claddach Kirkibost chosen? Shops, churches and schools are all some way off and local transport links are poor. Has there been any attempt to scope out the social impact of these homes on the lives of both the existing population and the new residents? Creating “Affordable homes” is laudable but in this location you own “affordable transport” is a prerequisite. Without this tenants will be isolated and dependent on others and the effect of this development will have been to create a marginalised, underprivileged enclave.” • The nearest shop is a 50 minute walk from here. Public transport is limited. There are no amenities for children. They will have to be transported everywhere.” • “It seems to me to be very strange to build “affordable housing” in a location where there area no amenities except a public house and a very inadequate bus service. Assuming that there may be people with little or no income who won’t have a car, how would they get to a shop or Post Office, or even to medical services? I know the problems my former neighbour had in this regard. It would seem more sensible to build this scheme on good solid ground such as Bayhead or Clachan. There is also the danger for the children in these houses, should one climb over the fence and into the bog: what difficulties there would be.” • “The local community does not appear to have sought or support this development and it seems to have been pushed by developers more aware of potential profits than the impact on the lives of present and future residents.” • “Water supply problems – water supply pressure is already a problem in the area and the additional demand will surely aggravate this. The plans contain no information on any steps taken to remedy this. A condition of approval should be obtaining verification from the water supplier regarding the adequacy of the present infrastructure’s capacity to cope with the extra dwellings.” • “I feel this development will go ahead no matter what I say. This will have an impact on the value of my house. Had I know five years ago that this proposed development was a possibility I would have never purchased here...” • “As solutions we would suggest 1. the Development is less dense. This would also be in keeping with the existing local built environment; 2. adequate drainage is put in place so that surrounding land does not suffer from increased saturation; 3. any development is situated further from the boundary line to not dominate and overshadow that aspect of the Westford and would then be clear of future foliage and root systems. This is achievable by constructing any new buildings further from the boundary by decreasing the size of the proposed front gardens and increasing the length of the back gardens of the housing being considered; 4. that the existing stone wall to the left of the proposed development, as you face the entrances to the buildings as shown on the plans, is rebuilt and then, forming a right angle, extended along the other side of the boundary of the Westford grounds until it meets the main road.” “We would also request that any development, if the application is eventually approved, be done in sympathy with the local environment and the historic nature of the Westford, for example: 1 That there is no street lighting or that if street lighting is absolutely required it is low level down lighting on timers and that it does not contribute to light pollution; 2. That the proposed buildings enhance the local environment and are in keeping with the historic nature of the Westford (e.g. stone construction, roofed in slate); 3. That the height of the structures retain a cottage dimension in keeping with similar older local single storey buildings; 4. That the buildings be detached structures, also being in keeping with the local buildings.'

RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION

HISTORIC 6.1 ‘There are no A Listed Buildings nearby - the setting of the B Listed Building immediately adjacent to the development area is a matter for the Comhairle to consider.

Although the proposed development area is likely to be visible from two scheduled monuments (Loch na Buail'Iochdraich, Shielings and Standing Stone N of - Index 5882 and Leacach an Tigh Cloiche, Chambered Cairn, Standing Stone and House - Index 5881) there is sufficient intervening distance to suggest that there is unlikely to be any significant detrimental impact on their settings.’

SCOTTISH WATER 6.2 ‘Scottish Water has no objection to this planning application. This response is made based on the information available to us at this time and does not guarantee a connection to Scottish Water's infrastructure. A separate application should be submitted to us made for connection to our infrastructure after full planning has been granted. There are no public sewers in the vicinity of the proposed development. Bayhead Water Treatment Works may have capacity to service this proposed development. The water network that serves the proposed development may be able to supply the new demand. A totally separate drainage system will be required with the surface water discharging to a suitable outlet. Scottish Water requires a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) as detailed in Sewers for Scotland 2 if the system is to be considered for adoption. If the connection to public sewer and/or water main requires to be laid through land out-with public ownership, the developer must provide evidence of formal approval from the affected landowner(s). This should be done through a deed of servitude. If the developer requires any further assistance or information on our response, please contact me on the above number or alternatively additional information is available on our website: www.scottishwater.co.uk.’

MOD 6.3 ‘No Safeguarding objections to this proposal.’

SEPA 6.4 ‘To assist with streamlining the planning process, SEPA now focuses its site specific advice in development management where we can add best value in terms of enabling good development and protecting Scotland’s environment. We have therefore provided standing advice applicable to this type of small-scale local development which is available at www.sepa.org.uk planning.aspx.

We note on the consultation memo that you have consulted us specifically due to septic tank serving more than 10 people but as this site is not within an area we have identified as being a consultation area due to possible cumulative effects from private septic tank discharges, our standing advice should be used for this development.’

SCOTTISH AND SOUTHERN ENERGY 6.5 ‘SSE would like to register no objections to the above development of the 6 proposed properties and sewage plant. There is an existing mains cable running close to the proposed development and I would expect that you clearly identify and mark location of this cable prior to work commencing on site if the proposal is successful. In addition you will need to adhere too the HSE guidance note GS6 when working on the construction of the sewage plant. GS6 refers to work or passage of plant beneath overhead lines. If there will be passage of plant beneath the overhead network, please could you contact myself on either of the numbers above prior to work commencing to discuss what mitigation and/or remedial work is required to ensure safe passage of plant beneath the line so that it does not infringe on the statutory clearances.’

BUILDING STANDARDS 6.6 ‘Septic tank and soakaway to be at least 5.0m away from site boundary, 10.0m from roads etc. Access to septic tank to be suitable for servicing vehicles. No details of percolation provided. Fire hydrant or alternative supply of water must be provided for fire fighting within 100m of any house. Probably improve SAP/EPC for house with solar panel on west elevation if they were on south elevation. Care should be taken with activity spaces as the thickness of external walls may have to be increased to comply with new energy regulations.’ TECHNICAL SERVICES - ROADS 6.7 ‘Road layout generally acceptable. May need to extend turning head at west end to allow ease of egress for vehicle from 5p house. Parking for 12 No. vehicles to be provided as shown. Applicant should be satisfied that radii/turning head can cater for largest vehicle using access road i.e. bin wagon. Visibility splay of 5m x 90m required where access meets A865.’

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 6.8 ‘I confirm that there is a potential for noise from the neighbouring licensed premises affecting this development. To mitigate the effects of this I recommend conditions requiring screening fences and landscaping. Changes to the elevations facing the inn by moving the bedroom windows to the flank walls are also recommended.’

CLEANSING 6.9 Awaited.

VIEWS OF APPLICANT 7.1 The full terms of the views of the applicant can be read on the file at the Development Department. However, they can be summarised as follows:

• The site has been highlighted by the local council for development as part of their future housing strategy. • The existing top soil consists mostly of peat and it is intended to scrape this away so that the houses, garden areas and access road have suitable ground in which to build upon in accordance with the engineer’s information and drainage specification. • The foul and surface water drainage will be designed by an engineer in accordance with the current building regulations and the requirements of SEPA so that there is no adverse affect on the existing land and dwellings. • Technical services have confirmed that no street lighting is required but each dwelling will have automatic illumination above each entrance door. • It is proposed to have 1.8m timber fence between boundaries and neighbouring properties as noted on the revised site plan. Mixed species tree planting is also proposed along the north and east boundaries and around the sewage treatment plant to the south. • The specification and design of the house types are in accordance with the requirements of the local housing association and to the standards of an affordable dwelling. • The houses are of similar style to the surrounding bungalows. DECISIONS AFFECTING THE SITE 8.1 There are no decisions affecting the site. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 9.1 Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 says, “Where, in making any determination under the planning Acts, regard is to be had to the development plan, the determination shall be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.” Attention is therefore drawn initially to any relevant policies or other elements of the Development Plan. This is then followed by comment on any other material considerations before a conclusion is reached.

9.2 Although work is on going with regard to writing the Outer Local Development Plan, the Comhairle when determining planning applications should put no weight on the Housing Land Audit and therefore should assess this proposal against the policies in the current Structure and Local Plan as set out below. 9.3 Western Isles Structure Plan

PLAN REF RELEVANT TERMS IMPLICATIONS FOR THIS CASE DM1 Development proposals that can be The development can be absorbed absorbed without harming the local without harming the local social, social, economic or environmental economic or environmental characteristics of the Sustainable characteristics of the Sustainable Community Area in which they are Community Area. located, will generally be supported. Proposals serving social The site is close to the A865, which or community interests should have is serviced by a bus several times a regard to the needs of the users of day. such facilities and be located near a public transport node/ junction/ interchange and/or within safe and easy walking or cycling distance of their catchment population. The Local Plan will identify development opportunity sites within settlements and townships based on the following sequential approach:

i) firstly, re-using vacant or under- The proposal complies with this utilised land/buildings already policy as the site is within the developed (‘brownfield sites’) settlement. or emerging re-development opportunities; ii) secondly, land available in or near the middle of the settlement or township; and iii) thirdly, land available elsewhere in the settlement or township.

DM5 All development proposals should The proposal complies with this have regard to the availability of policy as the development will be supporting infrastructure (e.g. served by a treatment plant. water, sewerage, power) and Scottish Water has no objection to early consultation with service the development. It is for the providers will be encouraged, applicant to secure connection to particularly during the site services. selection process. In areas where there is insufficient capacity, prospective developers should liaise with the Comhairle and service providers regarding connections and, if necessary, either investigate suitable alternative sites or be willing to make a financial contribution to ensure adequate capacity… DM6 The Comhairle will consider Details have been provided showing favourably, proposals for the means of treating the surface water continued improvement of water drainage and the agents have and waste water systems, advised that the drainage treatment including first time provision of will be in accordance with Building mains drainage or communal Standards and SEPA’s regulations. systems in rural areas. Developers will be expected to adopt the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS)… Proposed private sewerage arrangements must be implemented without adverse impacts on groundwater or watercourses and provide for efficient treatment of effluent. DM7 In dealing with applications for Account has been taken of other development the Comhairle will Structure Plan policies when take account of the requirements of determining the application. other relevant Structure Plan policies and will ensure: i) quality siting, landscaping and The design of the development designs that incorporate follows guidance contained within sustainable management Appendix 2 of the Comhairle’s Local techniques. (In this regard the Plan. Comhairle will encourage development that follows the guidance contained in the Scottish Executive publication ‘Designing Places’ as well as its own Design Guidance); ii) no undue harm to neighbouring uses as a result of There will be no undue harm to the development; neighbouring uses as a result of the iii) appropriate provision is made development. to allow access for the disabled; Appropriate provision has been made to allow access for the iv) the impact on the natural disabled. heritage is fully considered (e.g. The site is classed as crofting 4 the Western Isles Landscape within the Western Isles Landscape Character Assessment will be Character Assessment. It is used); considered that this development will not have a significant effect on this character type. v) biodiversity and ecological interests are maintained and, The biodiversity and ecological where possible, enhanced. interests will not be detrimentally (Account will be taken of the impacted as a result of this actions and priorities contained development. in the Western Isles Local Biodiversity Action Plan currently in preparation); vi) appropriate measures are in place for the safe movement of Appropriate measures are in place traffic and associated parking for the safe movement of traffic. both on and off site; The provision of car parking on the vii) there will be no pollution site accords with the Appendix 3 of outwith prescribed limits to air, the Local Plan. land, fresh water or sea; There will be no pollution outwith viii) there will be no likelihood of prescribed limits as a result of this causing harmful erosion; development. HCL2 The Comhairle will work with other The proposal complies with this housing organisations and agencies policy as the development will to ensure the availability of sites for ensure the availability of affordable affordable housing to meet the local housing to meets the local needs of needs of each Sustainable the Sustainability Area. Community Area. RM13 The Comhairle will seek to conserve The houses have been sited so that the special architectural and historic they sit further back from the road interest of listed buildings and their than the front of Westford Inn. It is settings. It will support sympathetic considered that when viewed from conversions to secure their future the A865 heading North, the use and will only permit demolition development will not have a in exceptional circumstances significant impact on the setting of the Listed Building and therefore the proposal is assessed as complying with this policy.

9.4 Western Isles Local Plan

PLAN REF RELEVANT TERMS IMPLICATIONS FOR THIS CASE LP/DM1 In assessing development In assessing the application, proposals an appropriate and account has been taken of Structure acceptable quality of development Plan policy DM7 and of the and design that relates to setting considerations set out in the will be required. Account will be appendices of the Local Plan. The taken of Structure Plan policy DM7 development satisfies the and of the considerations set out in: requirements of the Local Plan Appendix 2: Development and appendices. Design Considerations Appendix 3: Car Parking Provision Appendix 4: Roads and Access. In assessing developments, potential cumulative impacts will be considered on the area as a whole. LP/RM1 In assessing development The development site is adjacent to proposals affecting conservation Westford Inn a category B Listed areas and listed buildings or their Building. Account has been taken settings, account will be taken of of Structure Plan policy RM13 and Structure Plan policies RM12 and Appendix 5. Although adjacent to RM13 as well as the considerations Westford it is considered that the set out in: development will not have a Appendix 5: Development affecting significant effect on the setting of Listed Buildings the Listed Building. Comhairle approved Conservation and Thatched Buildings policies. LP/HCL1 In addition to national and Structure Plan guidance, the assessment of proposals for housing will take account of: The site is within the existing location of the development within settlement of Claddach Kirkibost. the settlement; scale, density and appearance of the development in relation to its surroundings; As part of the Local need for housing and impact on the Development Plan Main Issues existing settlement, including Report consultation, it was socio/economic factors. expressed that there was a demand for housing sites within North Uist. More detailed requirements are set out in Appendix 2. In establishing road layouts and determining the infrastructure requirements for public sector investment in housing sites, attention will be paid to the development potential of adjacent areas

LP/HCL2 For the development of sites of 16 This policy relates more to the units or more the Comhairle will provision of private houses and the look for the developer to provide an requirement for affordable houses element of affordable housing (25% to be part of the development. minimum), unless otherwise specified for the proposal sites The proposal does not have to identified in the Local Plan. For comply with this policy as it is for developments of 15 units or less the 100% affordable housing. There is proportion of affordable housing no privately owned housing as part should be determined by the of the development. Planning Authority in relation to Local Housing Strategy priorities and where relevant in consultation with the appropriate Registered Social Landlord Appendix 2 Housing Developments in The site area is 5090 square Settlements metres. Providing a density that is Housing Density within the recommended housing density for rural areas as set out it …In relation to developments of 5 in the Comhairle’s Local Plan. It is housing units or more: however, recognised that the …For housing development in rural houses will be closer together than areas a reasonably low density level the surrounding houses. would be expected (generally up to 20 units per hectare.)

OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

SCOTTISH PLANNING POLICY HOUSING PARA 66-91 10.1 Paragraph 79 of the SPP states ‘New housing developments should be integrated with public transport and active travel networks, such as footpaths and cycle routes, rather than encouraging dependence on the car…’ The development is close to a public transport route and therefore will not encourage dependence on the car.

10.2 Paragraph 80 of the SPP states ‘Planning authorities should promote the efficient use of land and buildings, directing development towards sites within existing settlements where possible to make effective use of existing infrastructure and service capacity and to reduce energy consumption. …’ As discussed above the site is within the settlement and therefore complies with national policy. 10.3 Paragraph 83 of the SPP states ‘The density of new development should be determined in relation to the character of the place and its relative accessibility, with higher densities appropriate at central and accessible locations. Through good design it is possible to achieve higher density living environments without overcrowding or loss of amenity.’ The development is infill development surrounded by private houses on 3 sides. The proposal is of a higher density than the privately owned houses but there is still open space to the south of the proposed development that remains undeveloped. The density of the development is within the recommendations of local plan policy.

DRAINAGE 10.4 Representations have been received on the grounds that the site is a bog and will not drain property leaving the properties damp. There are already suggested problems with some of the houses not having suitable drainage and concerns were expressed that this development will make the situation worse. The applicants have provided detailed plans showing the surface water drainage and the sewage treatment plant, and filter mound. Building Standards have confirmed that the proposed treatment plant will comply with the Building Regulations. SEPA have not raised any objection in regard to drainage system and the increase in septic tanks in the vicinity. It is therefore considered that this objection does not merit refusal of the application.

LOSS OF PRIVACY 10.5 Concerns were raised about loss of privacy and overlooking. The applicants have amended their plans to have 1.1m high fences at the front of the houses and a 1.8m between the plots and at the rear of the plots. It is considered the provision of the fencing (and planting to the north) has addressed the loss of privacy and overlooking concerns and does not merit refusal of the application.

DESIGN, DENSITY AND SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT 10.6 The majority of the buildings surrounding the site are single storey, with white or grey rendered walls and dark roofs. The design complies with the Comhairle’s design guide and has taken account of the surrounding buildings. Although each house is smaller than the surrounding individual houses each block is roughly the same size. As stated in paragraph 9.3 above the density of the development is within the guidelines as set out in Appendix 2 of the Local Plan. This part of Claddach Kirkibost is already well developed with houses on both sides of the main road. It is considered that the settlement can accommodate this development without being detrimental to its character.

OVERSHADOWING 10.7 Concern was expressed that the development will overshadow the existing properties. The closest of the proposed houses will be 15m away from nearest existing house and therefore it is considered that any overshadowing will be minimal.

IMPACT ON THE SETTING OF A LISTED BUILDING 10.8 Para 113 of the Scottish Planning Policy states “The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 requires planning authorities, when determining applications for planning permission or listed building consent, to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses… There is a presumption against demolition or other works that will adversely affect a listed building or its setting”

10.9 The nearest property will be approximately 26m south of Westford Inn, a Category B Listed Building, there will be a 1.8m fence on the common boundary. It is acknowledged that the view of Westford Inn will be affected when driving along the access road to the houses to the west of the site. However, the majority of people will view Westford Inn from the A865. The developer has set the properties back from the main road and it is considered that the development will not have a significant impact on the setting of the Listed Building, when viewed from the A865. IMPACT ON WILD LIFE 10.10 It is acknowledged that there are wildlife that use the area for hunting and breeding. However, the owls and hen harriers will predominantly use the open moorland to the east of the site. The Department has spoken to SNH who verbally confirmed that last year there was a record of 1 calling male corncrake recorded 350m away. This means that the site is out with the area for female corncrakes. Although there is other wildlife that may use the site, there will still be undeveloped land in the area and the loss of this site will not have a significant impact on wildlife and does not merit refusal of the application.

IMPACT ON THE WATER SUPPLY 10.11 Scottish Water has raised no objection to the proposal and has advised that Bayhead water treatment plant may be able to supply water to the development. Scottish Water has stated that an application for water connection will have to be submitted once full planning permission is approved. Scottish Water have verbally said that if a new branch was taken from the water main then the water pressure to the existing houses will not be affected.

STREET LIGHTING 10.12 Several representations have been received on the issue of street lighting and the fact that there is no street lighting in the area. The majority of the surrounding properties do not want the site to be serviced with street lighting. Currently there is a single amenity street light at the front of Westford Inn close to the main road. Technical Services have verbally confirmed that for the road to be adopted by the Comhairle street lights do not need to be provided. They also verbally advised that if no street lights are provided at the time the site is developed then it is highly likely that street lighting will not be provided by the Comhairle at a later date. The applicants have confirmed that they do not intend to provide street lighting but will provide each house with an automatic light. However, provision will be made for street lighting in case it is required in the future. It is considered that this can be dealt with by condition and does not merit refusal on the grounds of this issue.

NOT ENOUGH ROOM UNDER THE OVERHEAD LINE FOR VEHICLES ACCESSING THE SEWAGE PLANT 10.13 Concern was raised that there will not be enough room under the electric overhead line. SSE have advised that they have no objection to the proposal and that the developer is to contact SSE if there is to be any movement of plant underneath the overhead line the developer should contact SSE to discuss what mitigation and/or remedial work is required. In any event the applicants have amended the proposal so that there septic tank will be access from the access track to the south and not go under the over head line. It is considered that this issue does not merit refusal of the application.

CONSULTATION ON USE OF SITE FOR HOUSING 10.14 The site has been identified as a potential housing site. Several objections to use this site for residential purposes were received during consultation on the Main Issues Report (for the Outer Hebrides Local Development Plan). The objector makes reference to a consultation period early in 2011. This was the original timetable to carry out the formal consultation on the Local Development Plan however the timetable has been altered. This has been communicated to all stakeholders.

10.15 At this moment in time the status of the Local Development plan has no weight when determining this planning application and therefore this issue should have no bearing on consideration of the planning application.

BETTER SITES 10.16 Representations have been received on the grounds that there are better housing sites within North Uist. In regard to this application there is no requirement to consider the suitability of other sites. The Comhairle is required to assess the development in terms of the current Development Plan which this Report addresses. TIMESCALE OF APPLICATION 10.17 Unlike some other planning authorities who have a time limit for the submission of representations after a valid planning application has been submitted, the Comhairle will accept representations until the decision is made. Although the neighbour notification asks for comments of representations to be submitted by a certain date, provision is also made that if people wish to make representations but are unable to do so by the date to let the Comhairle know it is their intention to make representations. It is considered that the fact that the application was submitted at the beginning of December has not been to the detriment of people making representations and does not merit refusal of the planning application.

PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING 10.18 Concern was raised that the Government guidance is for 25% of housing to be affordable and this application is for 100% affordable housing. This guidance is in relation to private housing schemes and that there should be a minimum of 25% of housing to be affordable. Government Guidance does not set a maximum level of provision of affordable housing and it does make provision for local authorities to set aside land solely for affordable housing if it is deemed necessary. Therefore, the application should not be refused on these grounds.

NOISE 10.19 It was raised that the housing surrounding the proposed housing site is predominately middle aged and elderly and this proposal has the potential to bring 15 children to the area. This is not a material planning consideration when determining this application.

10.20 Environmental Health has been consulted on the issue of the noise coming from the cooling unit and the impact that will have on the houses. Environmental Health response is above.

NO AMENITIES 10.21 Several of the letters of representation expressed concern over the lack of amenities in the vicinity and the fact that the residents would have to either have a car or rely on a poor bus service to get the residents to school or shops etc. The site is close to a bus route that connects with the main spinal route bus service. The area is served by a bus several times a day. It is considered that this issue does not merit refusal of the application.

UN-NECESSARY DEVELOPMENT 10.22 It was raised that the local community does not support the application. The issue of lack of land for housing in North Uist was raised by several people including North Uist Community Council during the consultation on the Main Issues Report. The use of this site for housing contributes to the supply of housing in North Uist.

DEVALUATION OF PROPERTY 10.23 Concern was expressed that the proposed development will devalue existing properties. This is not a material planning consideration and cannot be taken into account when determining planning applications.

CONCLUSION 11.1 The application is for the erection of 6 affordable family houses for social rent to the south of Westford Inn at Claddach Kirkibost, North Uist. The houses will be single storey with white dry rendered walls, white uPVC windows and grey Marley concrete tiles. The roof pitch will be 40°. The fencing at the front of the houses will be 1.1m high and there will be a 1.8m high fence between the properties and to the rear. Several representations have been received on the grounds of impact on existing drainage, impact on the setting of a listed building, street lighting and loss of privacy. It is considered that the applicant has addressed the issues raised, they can be addressed by condition or they are not material planning considerations. 11.2 The assessment of the proposal has taken account of and complies with the Development Plan, Government policy and material planning considerations. It is considered that the application does not merit refusal and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

APPENDIX 1

SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED CONDITIONS

Condition 1 The development to which this planning permission relates shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the plans marked Amended in red and marked as received on 1 February 2011 and 2 February 2011. Reason In order to define the permission and avoid doubt

Condition 2 At no time throughout the life of the development to which this permission relates shall there be anything within the site (shown edged red on the approved plans) which would be over one metre in height within a splay measured five metres down the centre of the access from the edge of the public road, by ninety metres along the public road on either side of the access road. The one metre in height mentioned above shall be measured from the level of any part of the access which is within five metres of the edge of the public highway. Reason To enable the drivers of vehicles leaving the site to have a clear view along the highway in both directions.

Condition 3 The means of access hereby approved shall be surfaced, graded and drained so that throughout the life of the development no surface water flows from the access on to the public highway. Reason In order to prevent flooding onto the highway in the interests of road safety.

Condition 4 Before the houses, to which this planning permission relates, are first occupied the parking spaces as laid out in Approved Plan 01B shall be provided and paved to the satisfaction of the Comhairle as planning authority. Such spaces shall be kept clear of obstructions and retained only for the parking of vehicles throughout the life of the development. Reason To ensure adequate provision is made for parking clear of the highway in the interests of road safety..

Condition 5 Throughout the life of the development to which this planning permission relates there shall be no exposed underbuilding more than 600mm deep, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Comhairle as planning authority. Reason To reduce the impact of the development in the interests of visual amenity of the area.

Condition 6 All of the work relating to the approved scheme of landscaping shown on the plans and specifications attached to this planning permission shall be completed no later than in the first planting season following the first use or completion (whichever is the sooner) of the development approved by this planning permission. This shall apply unless an alternative phasing for implementing the scheme has been approved in writing by the Comhairle as planning authority before development starts in which case the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved phasing. The approved landscaping scheme shall then be retained throughout the life of the development. Reason In order to ensure the implementation of the approved landscaping in the interests of the amenity of the area.

Condition 7 Any trees, shrubs or other plants required to comply with condition 7 and which die, or are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, within a period of five years from the first use or completion (whichever is the sooner) of the development shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Comhairle, as planning authority, gives written consent to any variation. Reason In order to ensure the implementation of the approved landscaping in the interests of the amenity of the area.

Condition 8 Prior to the commencement of the development details including colour of the fencing and means of screening and securing the bins shall be submitted for approval to the Comhairle as planning authority. The approved details shall then be implemented and maintained throughout the life of the development to the satisfaction of the Comhairle as planning authority. Reason In the interests of visual amenity

Condition 9 One month before work commences on the water connection, details of how it is proposed to connect to the water main will be submitted to the Comhairle for approval. No work shall commence on the water connection until the Comhairle have approved the means of connection in writing. The development shall then be carried out and retained throughout the life of the development in compliance with the approved details unless agreed otherwise in writing with the Comhairle as planning authority. Reason To ensure that the development does not effect the water pressure to the neighbouring properties.

Condition 10 Prior to work commencing the existing electricity mains cable running close to the proposed development shall be identified and its location marked. Reason In the interests of health and safety.

Condition 11 Any construction operations on site to which this planning permission relates shall only take place between the hours of 0800 and 1900 on Mondays to Saturdays and shall not take place on Sundays. Reason In order to safeguard the amenities of neighbours.

Condition 12 Three of the four bedroom windows which face the Westford Inn on the two blocks of houses to the North of the site shall be moved to an alternative elevation. Reason In order to safeguard the amenity of the residents.

APPENDIX 2