ABERDEENSHIRE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINALISED RESPONSE TO PROPOSED PLAN CONSULTATION BUCHAN – RURAL HOUSING MARKET AREA There are no unresolved representations in relation to Issue 107- Ardallie / New Pitsligo Page 1 Issue 108 Settlement - Auchnagatt Development Section 6, The Proposals Map (p 20) Reporter: Schedule 1, Table 3 (p 26) plan Volume 3E Supplementary Guidance, Settlement reference: Statement, (p 3 & 4) Body or person(s) submitting a representation raising the issue (including reference number): 138 Mr Chris Richal 2055, 2077 Strutt & Parker LLP on behalf of Aberdeen Endowments Trust 2067 Baxter Design Ltd on behalf of Mr & Mrs G Gall Provision of the development plan Allocations at M1 & H1. to which the issue relates: Planning Authority’s summary of the representation(s): Site M1 Auchnagatt 138: Express concern that the development will devalue their property, cause drainage and traffic issues, and spoil the rural aspect of Auchnagatt. 2067: Support the proposal and are in the process of designing waste water proposals in conjunction with adjacent landowners on Main Issues Report site B32 [also site H1 in Auchnagatt] and Aberdeenshire Council. Site H1 Auchnagatt 2055: The respondent expresses support for the site. 2077: Supports site H1, but objects to Table 2 in Schedule 1 of the plan showing only 25 houses in the first phase of the plan, whereas 31 houses are proposed on the supplementary guidance (6 houses are being carried forward from the current plan). Modifications sought by those submitting representations: 138: Delete site M1. 2077: Amend Table 2 in Schedule 1 to show 31 houses in the first phase of the plan rather than 25. Summary of responses (including reasons) by Planning Authority: Overview Auchnagatt is located within the Local Growth and Diversification Area, within the Rural Housing Market Area. Development has been proposed to sustain existing local services, meet local need for housing and provide opportunities for small scale employment land. The allocations made are appropriate and sufficient for the purposes of delivering the strategy and aims of the Structure Plan. Further information on the sites is contained in the 'Issues and Actions Volume 3 Buchan’ paper (May 2010, pages 4 and 5), which was informed by the Main Issues Report consultation, and was produced to inform the allocations in the Proposed Plan Site M1 Auchnagatt The impact an allocation may have on the value of a property is not a material planning consideration and therefore, it is not sufficient to justify its deletion from the plan. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency notes that a minor watercourse runs through the site, but did not perceive the flood risk as significant enough to object to the site. Additional wording has been added to the supplementary guidance highlighting the flood risk and a need for a buffer strip adjacent to the watercourse. The Council’s Roads Authority did not raise traffic or access concerns as an issue for the site. They note that the main access point should be taken onto the A948 with a second vehicle access point onto the minor road to the south of the site. The also note that the speed limit will have to be extended. Page 2 The scale and location of the site is unlikely to spoil the rural aspect of Auchnagatt. Its visual prominence is reduced in light of the hilly topography of Auchnagatt and the existing buildings on its eastern corner. Furthermore, development is also proposed opposite the site (EH1), which will reduce its visual and townscape impact on the setting of Auchnagatt. The support for the site is welcomed. Site H1 Auchnagatt The support for the site is welcomed. Schedule 1 of the plan is only intended to show new allocations, i.e. those required to meet the structure plan. The Council’s position in relation to including existing local plan allocations within Table 2 is addressed in Issue 25 Schedule 1 Housing Land. Conclusion The modification sought to delete site M1 is not supported. The development strategy and land allocation in Auchnagatt is appropriate and sufficient to meet the needs of the settlement strategy. Any further plan changes commended by the Planning Authority: No changes are commended. Reporter’s conclusions: <INSERT TEXT> Reporter’s recommendations: <INSERT TEXT> Page 3 Issue 109 Settlement – Cruden Bay Section 6, The Proposals Map, (p20) Reporter: Development plan Schedule 1, Table 3, (p26) reference: Document 3E Supplementary Guidance, Settlement Statement (p 9 & 10) Body or person(s) submitting a representation raising the issue (including reference number): 133 Mr Thomas Campbell 140 Mr James Kidd 351 Mr George Moir on behalf of AC Watson 487 Mrs Lesley Jones 555 Mr David Johnston 833 Mr John Moir 1148 Malcolm Campbell on behalf of George Smith & Sons 1590 Archial Planning 1920, 1921, 2118, 2119 Ryden LLP on behalf of W Nicol, A Butters and D Cooper Provision of the development plan to M1, H1 & EH1 Allocations at Cruden Bay. which the issue relates: Planning Authority’s summary of the representation(s): Site H1 Cruden Bay 140, 351, 833: Express concern that development of the site will have a detrimental effect on the area, as it will remove the open view to the links and sea on approach to the settlement. 487, 555: Express concern with the loss of view from their home. 351: Expresses concern with invasion of privacy within the development as there is a steep dip to the south of the site. 140, 351, 833: Express concern that the housing density is too large and would result in over development of the site. 140, 351, 487, 555: Express concern that access onto the existing road will have to be outside the village boundary/site. 555: Express concern that the development would increase traffic on an already busy road. 140, 351, 487, 555, 833: The respondents suggest there is no requirement for the land to be developed, as sites EH1 and M1 will provide adequate housing for the foreseeable future, and it is reported that present houses are not selling (487). 140, 351, 487, 555, 833: Express concern that development of the site would infringe on wildlife habitat used by insects and animals including deer and birds of prey. 555: Suggests the development would put a strain on services, as the sewage pipe has already been increased and can be seen above ground. 833: The respondent does not support the site as there are inadequate facilities in the village (shops, school, etc). 1920, 1921, 2118, 2119: The respondent expresses support for the site as it will create a logical expansion of Cruden Bay, and is well placed to provide a number of benefits, including increasing the school roll, provision of a public footpath link to the golf club and town centre, and strategic landscaping to the south of the settlement. Site EH1 Cruden Bay 133: Expresses concern that the construction of the proposed houses will affect his sleep. 1148: Requests that site EH1 is allocated for 102 houses in the second phase of the plan. 1590: In light of the planning history and the size of the site, the respondent requests an increase in the allocation from 102 houses to 200 houses. Modifications sought by those submitting representations: Page 4 140, 351, 487, 555, 833: Delete site H1. 1148: Allocate site EH1 for 102 houses in the second phase of the plan. 1590: Increase the allocation of site EH1 from 102 houses to 200 houses. Summary of responses (including reasons) by Planning Authority: Overview Cruden Bay is located within the Local growth and Diversification Area, within the Rural Housing Market Area. The settlement strategy within the local growth and diversification area focuses development on settlements that will allow the provision of important infrastructure, or have specific needs identified (see issue 66). Cruden Bay is located a few miles from the A90 and provides a number of services. The school is forecast to be at 62% of its capacity by 2016, but has limited opportunity to be extended in the future. In light of this capacity, but to avoid the need for a second primary school and over-development, two allocations of up to 240 houses in total are proposed to provide housing choice and an opportunity for employment land in the Energetica corridor, and to sustain existing local services. These allocations are proposed to the west of the village to improve the settlement boundary. The current plan identified the west side of Cruden Bay as an area of search for future housing (site fh3*) for this purpose. Two existing housing sites in the current plan are also carried forward for development for 116 houses. In total this represents an almost 50% increase in the size of the village, but Scottish Planning Policy (para 70) identifies that a planned level or direction of growth may not reflect past trends and that development should be located to make efficient use of infrastructure (para. 77). The allocations made are appropriate and sufficient for the purposes of delivering the strategy and aims of the Structure Plan. In light of this, there is no requirement to consider alternative sites. A number of the issues raised in relation to this settlement were raised in response to the consultation on the Main Issues Report, and were considered in the ‘Issues and Actions Volume 3, Buchan’ paper (May 2010, pages 14 to 17). Site H1 Cruden Bay The existing housing development east of the site already affects the views of the coastal landscape when approaching the settlement from the west. The site follows an existing field boundary, and provides an opportunity (along with site M1) to improve the western boundary of the settlement with strategic landscaping, which is currently lacking.