Resources & Governance, Legal & Democratic Services, Clackmannanshire Council, Kilncraigs, Greenside Street, Alloa, FK10 1EB Phone: 01259 452106/452004 E-mail: customerservice@clacks.gov.uk Web: www.clacks.gov.uk

Date

Time

Kilncraigs, Greenside Street, Alloa, FK10 1EB (Tel.01259-450000)

Meeting of the Planning Committee

Thursday 23 November 2017 at 9.30 am

Venue: Council Chamber, Kilncraigs, Greenside Street, Alloa, FK10 1EB

1

Planning Committee Subject to paragraphs 3.28 and 11.4 of the Scheme of Delegation, the Planning Committee

has responsibility for taking decisions on planning applications and enforcing planning laws,

and;

Carrying out the local authority's function in relation to street naming under section 97 of the

Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982; and

Dealing with regulatory and enforcement issues arising from matters delegated to or

delivered by Community and Regulatory Services related to Building Standards.

2

Contact Resources & Governance (Legal & Democratic Services) Clackmannanshire Council, Kilncraigs, Greenside Street, Alloa, FK10 1EB Phone: 01259 452106/452004 email: customerservice@clacks.gov.uk web: www.clacksweb.org.uk

15 November 2017 A MEETING of the PLANNING COMMITTEE will be held within the Council Chamber, Kilncraigs, Greenside Street, Alloa, FK10 1EB, on THURSDAY 23 NOVEMBER 2017 at 9.30 am.

GARRY DALLAS Executive Director

B U S I N E S S

Page No.

1. Apologies - - 2. Declaration of Interests - - Members should declare any financial or non-financial interests they have in any item on this agenda, identifying the relevant agenda item and the nature of their interest in accordance with the Councillors’ Code of Conduct. A Declaration of Interest form should be completed and passed to the Committee Officer. 3. Confirm Minutes of Meeting held on 26 October 2017 07

(Copy herewith) 4. Planning Application – Change of Use and Alterations of 11

Part of Commercial Fishery Building to 1 No. House (Fishery Manager House) and 2 No. Holiday Letting Units at Woodhill Fishery, Alva, Clackmannanshire, FK12 5HU (Ref. 17/000176/FULL) – report by the Principal Planner (Copy herewith)

5. Planning Application – Erection of 2 No Houses at Play 31

Park, Rowan Crescent, Menstrie, Clackmannanshire (Ref. 17/00210/PPP) – report by the Principal Planner (Copy herewith)

3

4

280617

Planning Committee – Committee Members (Membership 10 – Quorum 4)

Councillors Wards

Councillor Donald Balsillie (Chair) 2 Clackmannanshire North SNP

Councillor Phil Fairlie (Vice Chair) 3 Clackmannanshire Central SNP

Councillor Tina Murphy 1 Clackmannanshire West SNP

Councillor George Matchett, QPM 1 Clackmannanshire West LAB

Councillor Martha Benny 2 Clackmannanshire North CONS

Councillor Archie Drummond 2 Clackmannanshire North SNP

Councillor Derek Stewart 3 Clackmannanshire Central LAB

Councillor Chris Dixon 4 Clackmannanshire South CONS

Councillor Kenneth Earle 4 Clackmannanshire South LAB

Councillor Bill Mason 5 Clackmannanshire East CONS

5

6

MINUTES OF MEETING of the PLANNING COMMITTEE held within the Council Chamber, Kilncraigs, Greenside Street, Alloa, FK10 1EB, on THURSDAY 26 OCTOBER 2017 at 9.30 am. PRESENT

Councillor Donald Balsillie, Chair (In the Chair) Councillor Martha Benny Councillor Chris Dixon Councillor Archie Drummond Councillor Kenneth Earle Councillor Bill Mason Councillor George Matchett, QPM Councillor Tina Murphy Councillor Les Sharp (S) Councillor Derek Stewart IN ATTENDANCE Julie Hamilton, Development Service Manager Keith Johnstone, Principal Planner Allan Finlayson, Team Leader, Planning and Building Standards Stuart McQueen, Solicitor (Clerk to the Committee) Margaret Summers, Committee Services On behalf of the Committee, the Chair welcomed Mr Allan Finlayson, Team Leader, Planning and Building Standards, to his first meeting of Clackmannanshire Council’s Planning Committee. PLA(17)19 APOLOGIES Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Phil Fairlie. Councillor Les Sharp attended as substitute for Councillor Fairlie. PLA(17)20 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST None PLA(17)21 MINUTES OF MEETING: PLANNING COMMITTEE 14 SEPTEMBER 2017 The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14 September 2017 were submitted for approval. Moved by Councillor Donald Balsillie. Seconded by Councillor Martha Benny. Decision The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14 September 2017 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

THIS PAPER RELATES TO ITEM 03

ON THE AGENDA

7

PLA(17)22 PLANNING APPLICATION Application for Planning Permission – Extension to Existing Wind Farm Comprising Installation of 3 No. Wind Turbines, Crane Hardstandings, Access Tracks, Borrow Pit and Ancillary Works, at Burnfoot Hill Windfarm, Land at Burnfoot Hill, Tillicoultry (Planning Reference 17/00026/FULL) A report of handling on the above application which sought to extend the existing windfarm known as Burnfoot Hill to the north of Tillicoultry was submitted by the Principal Planner. The report considered the application and accompanying Environmental Statement submitted as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment undertaken by the applicant, addressed the responses from consultees and representations from third parties, examined the key planning issues in relation to relevant Local Development Plan policies and guidance and national policy advice and made recommendation to the Committee. Attending Ms Sarah Dooley, Wind Prospect Developments Ltd (on behalf of the Applicant) Mr Stuart Dean, Chair, Friends of the Ochils (Objector) The Committee heard representation on behalf of the applicant and objector and had opportunity to put questions to both parties. Motion That Committee approves the application subject to the prior conclusion set out at paragraphs 2.1 (a) and (b) of the report and subject to the conditions and reasons set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Moved by Councillor Donald Balsillie. Seconded by Councillor Les Sharp. Decision The Committee agreed unanimously to approve the application for planning permission subject to the prior conclusion of: (a) The unilateral obligation proposed by the applicant under Section 75 of the Town and

Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended to restrict the residential use of the farmhouse and/or other buildings at Backhills Farm during the operational period of the development as described in paragraph 1.14 of Appendix 3, and

(b) The conclusion of an obligation between the applicant and the Council under Section 75

of the Act, to incorporate the proposed mitigation measures associated with the development, comprising the contribution of additional monies, as described in the final bullet point in paragraph 3.3 of the report and the fifth bullet point in paragraph 1.8 of Appendix 3, towards the Recreational Enhancement Fund and the review, extension and future management of the land included within the Habitat Management Area as described in the second bullet point in paragraph 1.11 of Appendix 3.

And subject to the conditions and reasons set out in Appendix 1 of the report

Action Development Services Manager

8

PLA(17)23 STREET NAMING REPORT FOR DEVELOPMENT AT FORMER ALVA ACADEMY (WEST) ALVA

A report which invited Committee to decide on the name of a new street for the development at the former Alva Academy, Alva, was submitted by the Principal Building Standards Surveyor. The report set out the results of the consultation exercise which sought suggested names for streets at the former Alva Academy development. Motion That the new street for the development at the former Alva Academy, Alva, be known as “Drummore” Moved by Councillor Derek Stewart. Seconded by Councillor Kenneth Earle. Having commented and challenged, Councillor Martha Benny proposed that the street be known as “Drummore Avenue”. A counter proposal was put forward by Councillor Donald Balsillie that the street be known as “Drummore Court”. Voting For “Drummore Avenue” 2 votes For “Drummore Court” 6 votes Decision Accordingly, on a division of 6 votes to 2 with 2 abstentions, the Committee agreed that the new street for the development at the former Alva Academy, Alva, be known as “Drummore Court”. Action Development Service Manager Ends 1050 hrs

9

10

CLACKMANNANSHIRE COUNCIL

Report to: Planning Committee

Date of Meeting: 23rd November 2017

Subject: Planning Application Ref 17/00176/FULL: Change of Use and Alterations of Part of Commercial Fishery Building to 1 No. House (Fishery Manager House) and 2 No. Holiday Letting Units at Woodhill Fishery, Alva, Clackmannanshire, FK12 5HU

Report by: Keith Johnstone, Principal Planner

1.0 Purpose

1.1. To provide an assessment of the above application for planning permission having consideration of the provisions of the Local Development Plan and any other material considerations, including the advice from consultees and any representations from third parties. It provides a recommendation on the application.

1.2. The proposal is for a Local Development which would normally be determined by Appointed Officers. However, in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation for such applications, this application requires to be determined by Committee following a request from a Member to refer it to Committee.

2.0 Recommendations

2.1. It is recommended that the application is APPROVED subject to;

a) the prior conclusion of an Obligation under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act, 1997, as amended, to regulate the proposed fishery manager`s accommodation as follows;

restrict occupancy of the proposed residential accommodation only to someone employed full time in the management and running of the fishery business at the site; and

to prevent the separate disposal of the residential accommodation from the rest of the building and the land comprising the fishery.

b) the undernoted conditions 1. The development hereby approved shall be implemented in accordance with drawings and other documentation approved as part of this planning permission.

THIS PAPER RELATES TO ITEM 04

ON THE AGENDA

11

2. Before any works start on site details of the following shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as planning authority;

a. The colour and finish of the external walls, roof and window and door units associated with the alterations to the building hereby approved. b. The location, design and colour of any means of enclosure within the site. c. The location and specification of any external lighting within the site. d. The location and design of any foul drainage treatment system to service the development. e. The proposed phasing of implementation and completion of the approved development. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council, as planning authority. 3. Before any construction works commence on site, a planting specification for the landscaping scheme annotated on the approved plan number 4282/07 – Proposed Landscaping Plan, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as planning authority. The specification shall be designed to help screen the building and enhance the biodiversity value of the site. It shall include; a. Details of plant species, sizes, planting distances and means of protection and establishment. b. The retention of existing native trees along the north and east boundaries of the site. Thereafter, the landscaping shall be implemented within the first planting season following the commencement of the development, unless otherwise agreed by the Council, as planning authority. 4. No trees, shrubs, hedges within or adjacent to the site shall be lopped, topped, felled or removed without the prior written consent of the Council, as planning authority. 5. The 2 holiday letting units hereby approved and outlined in green on the approved Proposed Floor Plan shall be used solely for holiday and tourism purposes. For the avoidance of doubt, this permission does not authorise the use of the 2 units as the sole or main place of residence for any of their occupants. 6. Each holiday letting unit hereby approved shall be unoccupied for a minimum of 4 complete weeks in any calendar year, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Council. 7. Before any works start on site, details of a method statement shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, as planning authority, which shall facilitate the monitoring by the Planning Authority of the length and type of occupancy and occupancy periods by individual occupiers, allowing access to letting records to ensure that the

12

requirements of Conditions 5 and 6 are respected for all time. The development shall be implemented and operated thereafter in accordance with the approved details. 8. The fishery manager`s house hereby approved shall occupy the area outlined in brown only as annotated on the approved Proposed Floor Plan. 9. Notwithstanding the provisions of Classes 1,2 and 3 of Part 1, Schedule 1 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Scotland) Order 1992, as amended, the building comprising the fishery manager`s house shall not be altered or enlarged in any way nor any building and/or means of enclosure erected within its curtilage without the express grant of planning permission from the planning authority. Reasons 1. To retain effective control over the development, in the interests of visual amenity and the requirements of Policies EA8, SC23, SC24 and SC25 of the adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan. 2. To consider these details yet to be submitted and in the interests of visual amenity, the countryside character of the area and to retain effective control over the development. 3. In the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard and enhance the landscape character of the surrounding area and Green Belt. 4. In the interests of visual amenity and local biodiversity 5. In order to ensure that the 2 holiday letting units hereby approved are utilised for their intended and approved purpose and not for permanent housing use, having regard to the aims and requirements of Policies SC23, SC24 and SC25 of the adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan. 6. In order to ensure that the 2 holiday letting units hereby approved are utilised for their intended and approved purpose and not for permanent housing use, having regard to the aims and requirements of Policies SC23, SC24 and SC25 of the adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan. 7. To ensure that the Planning Authority can effectively monitor the development to help guard against the development migrating into residential use in the longer term, having regard to the policy context set out in Policies SC23, SC24 and SC25 of the adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan. 8. For the avoidance of doubt and to retain effective control over the residential use of part of the building having regard to the aims and requirements of Policies SC23, SC24 and SC25 of the adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan.

13

9. In order to retain effective control of the character and appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard the landscape character of the surrounding area and Green Belt.

2.2 Reasons for Decision

1. Subject to the proposed Obligation and conditions, it is concluded that the development would accord with the provisions of the adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan.

2. There are no other material considerations which would outweigh the Development Plan support for the development and justify withholding permission.

2.3 Plans Relating to the Decision

4282/00 – Ordnance Survey Base Map

4282/000 – Location Plan

4282/01 – Existing Site Plan

4282/02 – Proposed Site Plan

4282/03 – Existing Floor Plan

4282/04 – Existing Sections and Elevations

4282/05 – Proposed Floor Plan

4282/06 – Proposed Sections and Elevations

4282/07 – Proposed Landscaping Plan

3.0 Considerations

3.1. Background

3.2. The application seeks permission to alter and change the use of an existing single storey building located to the north of pond at Woodhill Fishery (see attached Location Plan). The building currently is used in connection with the running of the fishery. The development would comprise;

The alteration and change of use of just under half of the building on the eastern side from storage to 2 self catering holiday units. This would include alterations to the existing door openings on the south and north elevations to install window units. The existing carpark area which serves the fishery would provide parking for the units. The units would each have 2 bedrooms.

The material change of use of part of the western half of the building to be used for residential use by the fishery manager. The proposed floor plan would include 2 bedrooms, a family room, a bathroom and kitchen

14

area as well as an office, customer toilet and office area. The residential accommodation would occupy approximately 84 square metres including an area of 31 square metres which would include office and kitchen space. This would be approximately 48% of the overall floorspace of the building which comprises 176 square metres in total. This part of the building is currently used to provide office and staff facilities including a reception and office. The owner also uses one room as a bedroom to provide overnight accommodation as he regularly stays to provide security of the fishery. The purpose and nature of this overnight accommodation is considered to be ancillary to the lawful use of the building and site as a commercial fishery as it is not used as a main place of residence.

The applicant has also submitted a landscaping plan which would include new and replacement planting around the boundaries of the fishery.

3.3 The site is accessed by a private track from the A91. The track also serves 2 houses and agricultural land in separate ownership to the fishery site. The applicant owns the section of track closest to the fishery which extends for approximately 125 metres to link with the main track.

3.4 The site has a lengthy planning history and details of previous planning applications relevant to the building have been provided in Appendix 1 at the end of the Report. The building was originally built around 1989 as a stable building associated with the then owner’s permission for a heavy horse centre. The current approved use of the building is for use in connection with the fishery. Permission was granted for the western half of the building to be used as office and storage use in 2011 as part of the permission to re-establish the fishery use (Ref 11/00182/FULL) and a subsequent permission was granted in 2015 to change the use of the eastern part of the building from stables to fishery use (Ref 15/00029/FULL). The fishery operates throughout the year on a seasonal basis typically open between 0800-2300 during the summer months and 0900-1800 during the winter months.

3.5 The planning history in Appendix 1 provides details of relevant previous applications relating to the stable building. This includes proposals to change all or part of the building to use as a dwelling house, café and a restaurant. The proposals including residential use were mainly related to developments to establish or re-establish the fishery or a tourism related business at the site. Some of the proposals included the proposed extension of the stable building. Planning permission has not previously been granted for permanent residential accommodation within the former stable building as the proposals were not considered to meet the relevant planning policy requirements at the time.

3.6 Consultations

3.7 Roads and Transportation consider that the proposed development would not generate any significant change in traffic movements at the A91 junction in terms of road safety. They do not object to residential accommodation on the basis that it is related to the fishery or tourism use. Comment It is considered that there would not be grounds on the basis of road or pedestrian safety to justify withholding permission for the development having regard to the

15

existing lawful use of the site and the scale and nature of the proposed development.

3.8 Environmental Health was consulted and has not raised any objections.

3.9 Scottish Water does not object. They advise there is no public sewer near the site. Comment – The development would be served by a private sewage treatment system.

3.10 SEPA does not object and note that the building is outwith any area at medium to high risk of flooding.

3.11 Representations

3.12 There was one notifiable neighbour on the application.

3.13 A total of 4 representations have been received on the application although no immediate neighbours have commented. Of these 3 are in support of the application and 1 objects. These are listed below, starting with the objector;

Mr A Wright, 4 Lanark Road, Carluke

Mr D Blyth, 47 St Serfs Walk, Alva

Ms A Donofrio, 22 Candleriggs Court, Alloa

Ms D Livingstone, 19 Clackmannan Road, Alloa

3.14 The points raised can be summarised as follows;

Support

the development would boost local tourism.

the Council should support this family business and give them the security they need to stay open.

Object

the fishery does not have a strong enough customer base to justify destroying the natural environment. There is only minimal promotion of the fishery business. The development is accessed down a single track road which is not maintained. Comment – we are satisfied that the fishery business is trading as a going concern and the applicant`s father has been running it for over 2 years. The applicant has explained that the proposed development would enable the expansion and diversification of the existing business if approved which would increase turnover and the profitability of the business thereby helping to sustain the facility in the future. The development would comprise the alteration and change of use of an existing building and it is not considered that the development would result in a significant adverse impact on the surrounding natural environment. The existing access arrangements are considered adequate to accommodate the proposed development which is not expected to generate any significant road safety impacts.

3.15 Supporting Statement

16

3.16 The applicant has submitted a statement in support of the application. This sets out the business and planning policy case for the development. The main points can be summarised as follows;

Woodhill Fishery has been trading since 2011 and has an established customer base. It was initially let out but the applicant`s father subsequently has been running the business.

The primary intention for the development is to increase the profitability of the business to allow it to continue to be run by the family as a going concern. The applicant intends to take over the running of the business when his father retires. The increase in income would allow investment in the fishery and the landscaping around the site. Without the development, the business is not likely to survive.

The fishery needs to be manned on a 24 hour basis to deter poaching of stock as well as theft and vandalism. It would not be viable to employ a night watchman as the costs would be too prohibitive. Currently, the applicant`s father stays overnight in the building to provide security, but this would not be a practicable arrangement for the applicant to enable him to take over the running of the business. He has a family and he would have to stay away from them. The proposed accommodation would be the minimum size necessary to accommodate the family and allow him to invest in and develop the business and to generate a suitable income.

A letter of support is included from VisitScotland relating to the proposed 2 holiday let units. They advise that the addition of quality visitor accommodation which would be consistent with national Tourism Scotland 2020 strategy and the developing Clackmannanshire Tourism Strategy.

A letter of support from the Chair of the Association of Scottish Stillwater Fisheries (ASSF) which represents commercial stillwater fisheries who are members of the Association. The Chair highlights the operational benefits of having an on-site presence on a 24 hour basis to run a fishery business having regard to his experience of dealing with the risk of theft, poaching, management, customer service and reducing business costs. In his experience the best run fisheries in Scotland are those where the manager stays on site.

The inclusion of a Crime Prevention Report prepared by Police Scotland. It recommends that additional security lighting is considered to cover the south side of the pond and this measure, together with 24 hour manned on-site security, would help to mitigate and deter poachers and criminals alike. No security lighting is proposed.

3.17 Planning Assessment

3.18 The application must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The adopted Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan (LDP) comprises the development plan. The site is located within a countryside area and within part of the designated Green Belt. It is also within an area identified as part of the Clackmannanshire Green Network

17

3.19 The most relevant policy provisions of the LDP are considered to comprise;

3.20 Policy SC12 (Access and Transport Requirements) – the Policy provides support for development where it can be safely and conveniently accessed by a choice of travel modes including walking and cycling as well as motor vehicles.

3.21 Policy SC23 (Development in the Countryside – General Principles) – the Policy states that new development will normally be directed to urban areas unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposal satisfies the criteria set out in the Policy. These include; a requirement for a countryside location; its compatibility with the surrounding area; it maintains or enhances the amenity and landscape character of the area; and the access and servicing arrangements would be adequate. Proposals for the conversion of existing buildings of traditional value, or re-use of a building considered worthy of retention and which would improve the amenity of the area, will normally be supported.

3.22 Policy SC24 (Residential Development in the Countryside) – The Policy states that in addition to the criteria in Policy SC23, residential development should meet at least one of the criteria in the Policy. These comprise; the proposal is integral to, and is necessary for, the full time management of an existing and well established countryside business including tourism development, which has not previously incorporated residential accommodation; or involves the replacement of an existing house on the site; or where accommodation is required in association with a new countryside business, a temporary consent may be granted for a temporary accommodation until such time as the business it is associated with becomes established.

3.23 Policy SC25 (Business Development in the Countryside) – The Policy states that in addition to the criteria in Policy SC23, the development should be supported by an appropriate business plan and either, the use requires a countryside location, or it forms an extension to or diversification of an existing enterprise.

3.24 EA1 (Clackmannanshire Green Network) – The Policy seeks to ensure development will respect and where possible enhance the Green Network, which contributes to the environmental quality and outdoor recreation opportunities in the area. Development should not result in the reduction of the connectivity, quality or extent of the network.

3.25 EA2 (Habitat Networks and Biodiversity) – the Policy seeks to protect and enhance habitats and landscape features which contribute to biodiversity habitat.

3.25 EA4 (Landscape Quality) – The Policy requires that development should be designed and located so that the landscape quality and visual characteristics of the surrounding area is maintained and wherever possible enhanced.

3.26 EA7 (Hedgerows, Trees and Tree Preservation Orders) – The Policy seeks to ensure existing trees and hedgerows are retained.

3.27 EA8 (Green Belt) – The Policy states that new development will not normally be permitted within Green Belt area except where it meets any of the criteria

18

in the Policy. This includes; development which comprises recreational uses that are compatible with an agricultural or natural setting; and development directly related to existing activities within the Green Belt where the development is of a small scale and ancillary to the existing use and the intensity of the activity is not significantly increased. New development should enhance the quality and distinctive character of the Green Belt area.

3.28 EA9 (Managing Flood Risk) – The Policy seeks to ensure development is not at an unacceptable risk of flooding or will not result in an unacceptable increase on flood risk elsewhere.

3.29 EA11 (Environmental Quality) – The Policy seeks to ensure development would not result in any unacceptable impacts on the environmental quality of the area such as form noise, air or light pollution.

3.30 The proposed development comprises 2 main elements, namely the partial change of use of the building to form 2 self catering holiday units in the eastern half, and to change the use of part of the western half of the building to create residential accommodation for the fishery manager to live at the site as described in paragraph 3.2 above. For ease of reference, we have considered each element separately against the relevant Policies and the conclusions of our assessment are summarised below;

3.31 2 self catering holiday units

3.32 The units would be formed within the existing building utilising an underused part used for storage associated with the fishery. The principle of this use within the building is not considered to be contrary to Policies SC23, SC25 and EA8 having regard to the following factors;

It would comprise the diversification and expansion of the existing fishery business, providing the opportunity for anglers to stay on site and extend their visit, as well as providing general holiday let accommodation in the area.

The scale and nature of the use and development is considered to be of a relatively small scale and complementary to the existing fishery use and would not result in any significant change to the character of the site or the surrounding area. The development would be formed within the existing building and the proposed alterations would not adversely affect the character of visual amenity of the area. The existing parking area would be used to serve the development.

In common with other similar developments approved in countryside areas, planning conditions could be attached to regulate the use for holiday/tourism purposes only. Their use as the main place of residence for the occupier would not be authorised.

The application has been supported by an appropriate business plan which outlines how the development would positively contribute to the viability and profitability of the existing business and help ensure the business is sustained.

19

The development could be satisfactorily serviced. There are no objections from Roads, Scottish Water or SEPA. The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan showing how the existing planting around the fishery site would be supplemented to improve the appearance, visual screening and biodiversity value of the site. The degree of screening that already exists and the enhancement proposed, together with the modest changes to the exterior of the building, would not result in an unacceptable impact on the existing landscape quality and character of the site and surrounding area.

3.33 Further to the points above, the development is not considered to be contrary to the requirements in the other relevant LDP Policies, namely SC12, EA1, EA2, EA4 and EA7. SEPA is satisfied that there would be no adverse flood risk issues. The proposed accommodation is not considered to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts on neighbours or the area having regard to the established fishery use at the site. The development is considered to accord with the requirements of Policies EA9 and EA11.

3.34 On balance, the holiday let accommodation is not considered to be contrary to the LDP subject to the proposed conditions.

3.35 Manager`s Accommodation

3.36 The proposed development would involve internal and external alterations to the existing fishery accommodation. Kitchen facilities for the manager would be provided in the staff room. The current approved layout consists of 4 rooms providing reception, office and staff facilities and 2 toilet/shower rooms. The actual internal layout deviates slightly from the approved floor plan in terms of the overall floorspace for the rooms (an additional 7 sqm), changes to the room sizes and the internal layout.

3.37 The applicant has explained that the fishery business is currently run by his father. His father is approaching retirement and the applicant would like to take over the running of the business. The business plan sets out proposals to expand the business operation, including the provision of holiday let accommodation. However, he has stated that without on site security, the fishery business would not be viable. He has highlighted that his father currently stays overnight on a regular basis to provide a security presence. However, while the personal circumstances of his father means he is able to provide an overnight presence, the applicant has a young family and he does not consider that it would be reasonable or practicable for him to stay overnight away from his family on a long term basis to provide essential supervision and security.

3.38 The principle of residential use would be regulated by Policies SC23, SC24 and EA8. Our assessment of the proposal, the supporting information and the circumstances of the site has concluded that the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed manager`s accommodation would be sufficiently in accordance with the relevant Policies in the LDP to justify approval. This conclusion has been reached having regard to the following points;

The accommodation would relate to an established business where there is evidence of overnight on-site security having been provided. The business plan information also indicates that the development of the business, including the provision of bait fishing and the holiday letting accommodation

20

would increase the profitability of the business and help secure the long term future of the business. The predicted increase in the profitability of the fishery business is required to provide sufficient income for the applicant in addition to the predicted income from the holiday letting accommodation.

Advice has been received from Police Scotland and on behalf of the Association of Scottish Stillwater Fisheries which provides support for the principle of 24 hour manned on site security to deter the risk of poaching and crime at this location.

Information submitted by the applicant on the costs and ineffectiveness of alternative security options such as security lighting or a CCTV system or employing a night watchman compared with having an on site presence on a 24 hour basis. The cost of employing a night-watchman could not be supported by the business while CCTV would also be expensive and would not be likely to be effective.

While we are not persuaded that there is a locational need for manager`s accommodation to ensure the effective operation of the holiday letting accommodation alone, it is considered that the evidence presented, as well as examples of fishery developments in neighbouring Council areas, demonstrates that there is an operational need for on site accommodation to run the fishery. The holiday let use is intended to contribute to the fishery business but the determining factor is the security and operational needs related to the fishery.

The above points collectively support the conclusion that the manager’s accommodation as proposed would be integral to, and necessary for, the full time management of a countryside business. In terms of the requirements of Policy SC 24, it is recognised that when the original permission for the fishery was granted over 25 years ago, there was residential accommodation on the same landholding which could have provided accommodation. The separation of the residential accommodation from the site has been a factor in the Council refusing previous applications for residential use. While the Policy seeks to address the consequences of the severance of a residential unit from a landholding which has a use with an operational need for a house, it is considered that the following factors provide a greater degree of support in this instance;

i) There is a fishery business established and trading as a going concern, at the site which was not the case at the time of most of the previous applications.

(ii) The applicant has submitted more detailed supporting evidence demonstrating the need for 24 hour on-site security comprising manager`s accommodation

(iii) The accommodation is considered to represent the minimum necessary to accommodate the applicant`s needs. It would comprise less than half of the total floorspace and would not involve the extension of the existing building or significant changes to the appearance of the building or the site. Planning conditions could be attached to remove permitted development rights to extend or alter the building to retain effective control

21

over the appearance and impact of the building on the visual amenity and landscape character of the area.

(iv) These circumstances would be materially different from those applicable to previous applications relating to this building. This includes the application for management accommodation in an extended building which was dismissed at appeal in 1997 (our ref C/96/222).

(v) The absence of any suitable alternative accommodation available to the applicant.

A Section 75 Obligation would have to be concluded by the applicant to; restrict the use of the accommodation to someone employed or last employed full time in the running of the commercial fishery and prevent the separate disposal of the accommodation from the remainder of the building and the land currently comprising the fishery. These measures are considered necessary to retain effective control over the function of the manager`s accommodation given the location of the site and related LDP policy guidance.

3.39 The proposed alterations to the building and the future operation of the accommodation is not considered to result in any significant adverse impact on the character of the building, the visual amenity of the area, the qualities of the local landscape and surrounding Green Belt or the amenity of neighbours given the nature and scale of the works required, the visual containment of the site and subject to the proposed conditions to regulate permitted development rights relating to the building and curtilage and control over external finishes. The policy conclusion relating to the holiday let units set out in paragraph 3.33 above would also apply to the proposed manager`s accommodation.

3.40 Overall, subject to the proposed Obligation and conditions, it is considered that the development would not be contrary to the provisions of the development plan and that, on balance, there would not be sufficient policy grounds to justify withholding permission.

3.41 Other Material Considerations

3.42 There are a number of other material considerations which have informed our assessment of the application. These are considered below.

3.42.1 The advice from consultees does not identify any objections or significant impediments to the development proceeding.

3.42.2 As discussed in paragraph 3.14 above, the representations and one objection do not raise issues which would justify withholding permission. The comments have been submitted by parties outwith the neighbouring area.

3.42.3 The development is considered to be largely in accordance with the relevant guidance in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP). SPP provides a presumption in favour of sustainable development and the development is considered to be economically, environmentally and socially sustainable. The expansion of an existing visitor facility would also be supported and

22

VisitScotland has provided support for the holiday let accommodation. The development would be consistent with the guidance relating to maintaining local landscape character, green infrastructure and managing development in accessible rural areas.

3.42.4 The planning application history of this building includes a number of proposals including residential use of all or part of the building. These are listed in Appendix 1. These were all refused permission including one proposal which was dismissed on appeal in 1997. It is considered however, that there are material differences between the current proposals and these previous applications which would contribute to our conclusion and positive recommendation. These factors comprise;

The development would only comprise the conversion of the existing building and not its extension to accommodate the manager`s accommodation. The proportion of the floorspace required for the accommodation would also be under half of the total floorspace and meet the minimum needs of the applicant.

The business to which the accommodation would relate has been established and is trading, unlike previous occasions.

The alterations are modest and would not significantly affect the established character or amenity of the area.

The building is not as prominent in the landscape since the existing established landscaping has enclosed the site. The prosed landscaping would help screen the development and enhance the amenity of the area and this part of the Green Belt.

It is considered that sufficient evidence has been submitted to justify the operational need for the manager`s accommodation which was not previously the case.

The development would not lead to the loss of an established visitor facility if implemented. Rather it would help sustain and expand the existing fishery business.

The proposed Section 75 Obligation and conditions would ensure that the development was implemented as justified and not create a precedent for further development.

There are no other houses in the same landholding as the applicant that could provide residential accommodation as was the case at the time of some of the previous applications. The weight that can be attached to the previous sub-division of the landholding and severance of houses from the fishery, while still material, has been reduced due to the changes in ownership, the scale of the proposed accommodation and the operational needs of the fishery business.

3.42.5 It is not considered that the development would create an unacceptable precedent for further development at the site or in other Green Belt locations due to the circumstances of the proposals.

23

3.42.6 On balance, it is not considered that there are other material considerations which would be sufficient to outweigh the development plan position and justify withholding planning permission subject to the proposed conditions and terms of the Section 75 Obligation.

3.42.7 In conclusion, it is considered that the applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated that the development would not be contrary to the provisions and policies in the LDP and there would not be any other material considerations to justify withholding permission.

4.0 Sustainability Implications

4.1. The development would comprise the conversion of an existing building related to an established countryside business. It would not adversely affect the environmental quality of the area and is accessible by active travel as well as the private car.

5.0 Resource Implications

5.1. Financial Details

5.2. The full financial implications of the recommendations are set out in the report. This includes a reference to full life cycle costs where appropriate. Yes

5.3. Finance have been consulted and have agreed the financial implications as set out in the report. Yes

5.4. Staffing

6.0 Exempt Reports

6.1. Is this report exempt? Yes (please detail the reasons for exemption below) No

7.0 Declarations The recommendations contained within this report support or implement our Corporate Priorities and Council Policies.

(1) Our Priorities (Please double click on the check box )

The area has a positive image and attracts people and businesses Our communities are more cohesive and inclusive People are better skilled, trained and ready for learning and employment Our communities are safer Vulnerable people and families are supported Substance misuse and its effects are reduced Health is improving and health inequalities are reducing

24

The environment is protected and enhanced for all The Council is effective, efficient and recognised for excellence

(2) Council Policies (Please detail)

8.0 Equalities Impact

8.1 Have you undertaken the required equalities impact assessment to ensure that no groups are adversely affected by the recommendations? Yes No

9.0 Legality

9.1 It has been confirmed that in adopting the recommendations contained in this report, the Council is acting within its legal powers. Yes

10.0 Appendices

10.1 Please list any appendices attached to this report. If there are no appendices, please state "none".

1. Planning History

11.0 Background Papers

11.1 Have you used other documents to compile your report? (All documents must be kept available by the author for public inspection for four years from the date of meeting at which the report is considered)

Yes (please list the documents below) No

Clackmannanshire LDP Scottish Planning Policy

Author(s)

NAME DESIGNATION TEL NO / EXTENSION

Keith Johnstone Principal Planner

Approved by

NAME DESIGNATION SIGNATURE

Allan Finlayson Planning & Building Standards Team Leader

Julie Hamilton

Development Services Manager

25

26

APPENDIX 1 – PLANNING HISTORY

App No Description Applicant Decision Decision Date

C/89/375 Partial Change of Use from Stable to Form Café

Mrs M Sharp

Refused 18.04.90

C/91/39 Change of Use of Land to form Trout Fishery and Excavation and Removal of Soils off site and Restoration of Horse Training Area Replacement

J Sharp Approved with conditions

15.05.91

C/91/391 Change of Use of Stable Block to form Cafeteria and Bailiffs Residential Accommodation

J Sharp Approved with conditions

26.02.92

C/92/129 Partial Change of Use of Stable Block to form Residential Accommodation for Fishery Management

J Sharp Refused 01.07.92

C/93/186 Change of Use of Existing Building (former Stable Block) to 1 House

R Murray Refused 01.09.93

C/96/222 Change of Use of Stable Block to Provide Residential Acocmmodation for Fishery/Cafeteria Management

J Hewitt Refused - Appeal Dismissed

29.01.97

C/97/058 Partial Change of Use of Vacant Section of Stable Block to Residential Use for Management of Tourism/Recreational Facilities

J Hewitt Refused 30.04.97

C/98/091 Erection of Office and Toilet for Fishery and Installation of Replacement Fish Holding Tanks

D Taylor Approved with conditions

24.7.98

C/98/213 Change of Use of Stables and Fishery Store to Form 1 House

D Taylor Withdrawn 27.10.88

27

C/99/048 Alteration, Extension and Change of use of Former Stables to form Licensed Cafeteria with Fishery Store

D Taylor Refused 26.05.99

C/99/264 Alterations, Extension and Change of Use of form Stable Block to House with Fishery Management Accommodation

D Taylor Refused 01.12.99

00/00050/FULL Alterations to and Change of Use of former Stables to Form House and Fishery Management Accommodation

D Taylor Fishery Accommodation Approved – House Refused

12.04.00

06/00380/FULL Siting of Touring Caravan as Residential Accommodation

D Taylor Approved for 1 Year

21.12.06

07/00141/FULL Erection of 1 No House D Taylor Refused 23.08.07

11/00182/FULL Development of Land, Pond and Stable Buildings as a Commercial Fishery

Douglas Cullens

Approved 23.08.11

15/00029/FULL Change of Us of part of Building From Stables to Commercial Fishery Use and Alterations

D Taylor Approved 15.04.15

28

290000

290000

6965

00

6965

00

6970

00

6970

00

1:5,000Scale:

Development & EnvironmentKilncraigs

Greenside StreetAlloa

FK10 1EB

Tel: 01259 450 000planning@clacks.gov.uk

Date:08-Nov-2017

17/00176/FULL – Woodhill Fishery, AlvaChange of Use and Alterations of Part of Commercial Fishery Building to1 No. House (Fishery Manager House) and 2 No. Holiday Letting Units

Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right 2017.All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100020783.

Ward: Clackmannanshire North OS Grid Ref: NS 90 960 50 100 150 200

Meters

LegendApplication site boundary

To Alva

To Tillicoultry

29

30

CLACKMANNANSHIRE COUNCIL

Report to: Planning Committee

Date of Meeting: 23 November 2017

Subject: Planning Application Ref: 17/00210/PPP - Erection Of 2 No. Houses – at Play Park, Rowan Crescent, Menstrie

Report by: Grant Baxter, Principal Planner

1.0 Purpose

1.1. To provide an assessment of the above noted planning application against the provisions of the Local Development Plan and other material considerations, and provide a recommendation on the application.

2.0 Recommendations

2.1. It is recommended that the application is refused for the following reasons:

1. The proposals would replace a valuable amenity space and play area serving local residents with a development which would not positively enhance the site or its surrounding townscape. The proposal would unacceptably increase development density of a planned open space and overall would reduce amenity and townscape quality in the street and surrounding area. The application does not therefore comply with the provisions of Policy SC5 of the Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan, adopted 2015.

2. The proposals would detrimentally affect the value and function of open spaces and recreational facilities in this community. No suitable alternative provision exists or is proposed, with the nearest alternative facility on the opposite side of a distributor road. The proposals would therefore result in a deficit in provision of safe and accessible open space and play area provision serving the local community. The application does not therefore comply with Policy SC10 of the Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan, adopted 2015 , the aims and objectives of the Clackmannanshire Open Space Strategy, 2014 nor the provisions of the Scottish Planning Policy, 2014.

Refused Plans

Drawing No.1 – Location Plan

Drawing No.2 – Site Plan

THIS PAPER RELATES TO ITEM 05

ON THE AGENDA

31

3.0 Considerations

3.1. Background

3.2. This is an application for planning permission in principle for residential development (2 No. houses) on the site of an existing children’s play area within a residential cul-de-sac in a modern housing development in Menstrie.

3.3. The site is 720m² and located within Rowan Crescent, a cul-de-sac of 38 No. houses in the Menstrie Mains housing development which contains just over 300 houses in total. Permission for the development was granted on appeal in 2002 and was subject to a Section 75 legal agreement which inter alia secured contributions to off-site open space and play improvements. The masterplan for the site also contained provision of 3 No. new equipped play areas, each located within one of the housing phases. The application site is comprised of one of these equipped play areas.

3.4. This particular play area is mainly laid out in grass and also includes a rubber surfaced area containing play equipment. It contains trees and shrubs and is enclosed by railings on its two road frontages and boundary walls and hedges where it adjoins house plots. Lay-by visitor parking bays lie on both road frontages adjacent to the play area.

3.5. The application is for planning permission in principle, but indicates that 2 No. houses are proposed and an indicative layout plan shows two house plots on the site.

3.6. The application is made by a private individual who is understood to have purchased the site from Greenbelt, the company that own and until recently, has maintained the other communal areas in this development.

3.7. There has been a recent change in circumstances in respect of land maintenance at the development. A resident of the development applied to the Lands Tribunal of Scotland for a determination of a question as to the validity, applicability or enforceability of a title condition under which Greenbelt were able to charge residents for maintenance of communal areas in the development, the land having been transferred to them by the original developer. The particular arrangement, where Greenbelt both own the communal land and charge residents for its upkeep is known as “the land-owning maintenance model”.

3.8. The Opinion of the Lands Tribunal, given on 2nd December 2015, was that the title condition was invalid, albeit on the basis of what is described as a “relatively narrow and technical issue”. In reporting the decision, the Clerk to the Tribunal noted ”How the difficulties caused by the failure of the burden in the present case are to be resolved is another matter and is for the respondents and those who own homes on the estate to take forward”.

3.9. Subsequent to the Lands Tribunal giving its Opinion, Greenbelt advised all residents that the pre-existing arrangements for land maintenance and charging would cease and it then put portions of communal space, including this play area, up for sale by auction.

32

3.10. Whilst the above circumstances give a context to the current application, it must be assessed on its own individual merits and in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

3.11. Consultations

3.12. Roads: No objections in principle, however an additional visitor’s parking space would require to be formed. Comment: There is likely to be scope to enlarge one of the existing parking bays to accommodate an additional space.

3.13. Scottish Water: No objections. Capacity exists in water and foul networks but cannot be reserved. Surface water will not normally be accepted into combined sewers.

3.14. Publicity and Representations

3.15. A total of 68 No. neighbouring proprietors were notified of the application.

3.16. A total of 65 No. objections have been received, including one from Menstrie Mains Residents Association. The names and addresses of those who have made representations are contained in Appendix 1 to this report. The concerns raised by objectors are summarised as follows:

3.16.1. The site is not a “former” play area as suggested by the applicant but is actively used by the community. Comment: The site is still in use as a play area, however the Council has no control over the maintenance of the play area or provision of play equipment.

3.16.2. The application is contrary to the original designation of the site as a play area in the overall masterplan for the site. Comment: This is one of three existing play areas identified in the original masterplan for the Menstrie Mains development.

3.16.3. The application is contrary to the Local Development Plan which seeks to protect play areas and open space from development. Comment: Policy SC10 makes a presumption against the loss or change of use of open spaces, including privately run facilities, unless specific criteria can be met. The criteria do not appear to be met in this proposal.

3.16.4. The application will reduce residential amenity and increase housing density in this cul-de-sac. Comment: The application would infill the only green space in this housing phase with additional development, thereby increasing housing density.

3.16.5. Child safety will be put at risk. This is the only play area on the south side of Hazel Avenue (the main development access road). Children will be forced to cross this road to reach the next nearest play area. Comment: Both the other equipped play areas in the nearest development lie on the opposite side of Hazel Avenue. The nearest is 125m away at Holly Grove.

3.16.6. Approval will set a precedent for Greenbelt to sell off other play areas and open spaces in the development. Comment: Whilst the planning application must be determined on its own individual merits, the Service is aware that other areas of communal land in the development have been put up for

33

auction, and that approval of this application may give rise to future disposal of communal land and further such planning applications.

3.16.7. There are insufficient details of the proposals in the application. Comment: The application is for Planning Permission in Principle only, and the level of detail submitted is therefore adequate.

3.16.8. There is a lack of visitor parking in the cul-de-sac. The application will require loss of existing parking to access the house plots. Comment: Visitor parking bays lie on the two roadside frontages of the play area. It appears to be possible to provide access to houses on the site and provide an additional visitor’s parking space as requested by the Roads Service.

3.16.9. The Council should have notified more residents of the application, not just the surrounding houses. Comment: The neighbour notification procedures for the application were carried out in accordance with procedure regulations.

3.16.10. The site is too small to accommodate 2 No. houses. Comment: The indicative layout appears to be of a similar density to houses around the site, however the result of infilling this open space within the development would be to increase overall density at the expense of a planned amenity space which would reduce the townscape quality in the street.

3.16.11. Construction traffic will be a risk to safety in the cul-de-sac due to the number of houses and narrow road. Comment: Whilst construction traffic may well cause disruption in the cul-de-sac, this would not be a reason to withhold planning permission.

3.16.12. Transfer of this land by the original developer to Greenbelt is part of a land banking scheme to allow future development. Comment: The Service cannot comment on this point as it is not a material planning consideration.

3.16.13. The application is contrary to Scottish Government. planning policies and Early Years Framework in respect of providing spaces for children to be more active. Comment: The Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) does not support the loss of open spaces that would result in a deficit of that particular type of provision in a local area. The proposals are not supported by a justification based on any audit or strategy, and have not demonstrated that a deficit in play provision wouldn’t result from the development. The current situation in respect of land maintenance in the development and indeed the sale of the play area to the applicant are not material considerations that would justify approval of this application.

3.16.14. There is insufficient capacity in Menstrie Primary School to accommodate the children from the houses. Comment: Current figures from Education Service indicate that Menstrie Primary School could accommodate the proposed development.

3.16.15. The proposed houses will overshadow and overlook adjacent houses. Comment: The application is made in principle only, and details of house design is indicative only, however it is likely that the site could be developed in a manner that would not detrimentally affect privacy and sunlight/daylight enjoyed by adjacent houses.

34

3.16.16. The play area provides a small wildlife habitat which would be lost if development goes ahead. Comment: The site is not identified for natural habitat value, but is an open space in this development that provides a degree of wildlife habitat.

3.17. Planning Assessment

3.18. The application must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan (LDP) adopted 2015 comprises the development plan.

3.19. The relevant policy provisions of the LDP are as follows:

3.19.1. Policy SC5 – Layout and Design Principles

3.19.2. Policy SC10 - Education, Community Facilities and Open Spaces

3.20. Policy SC5 requires new developments to contribute positively to their setting, including surrounding townscape and landscape and integrate well with existing streets. The policy also seeks to ensure new developments protect and enhance green networks and ensure development density reflects the character and quality of the surrounding townscape.

3.21. Taking account of these provisions, the proposals would entail the loss of a planned play area and open space within this residential area. The area sits on a corner within a cul-de-sac and is the only area of greenspace within this residential area. Replacing this area with built development would not be considered to positively enhance the site, or its surrounding townscape. In respect of development density, whilst it could be argued that the indicative two house layout is of a similar density to houses around the site, the result of infilling this open space would be to increase overall density at the expense of a planned green space and this would reduce the recreation provision and townscape quality in this residential area.

3.22. The application is not therefore considered to comply with the provisions of Policy SC5.

3.23. Policy SC10 seeks (inter alia) to retain and enhance the provision of community facilities and open spaces. It makes a presumption against development that would result in the loss or change of use of community facilities and open spaces, including privately run facilities unless specific criteria can be met. In assessing the criteria set out in the policy, the following conclusions can be reached:

3.23.1 The application site currently provides a community facility in the form of a play area and its development would adversely affect the value and function of open spaces in this community as a result of the loss of recreational facilities and open space.

3.23.2 No suitable alternative provision exists or is proposed;

3.23.3 The Council's Open Space Strategy recommends a quantity of play areas of 0.2Ha per 1000 population. The current provision in Menstrie is 0.12Ha per 1000 population.

35

3.24. The application is not therefore considered to comply with Policy SC10.

3.25. Other Material Considerations

3.26. The Council prepared an Open Space Strategy (OSS) in June 2014. This provides an audit of the quality, quantity and accessibility of open spaces, including play areas, in Clackmannanshire. The existing play area currently contributes to the achievement of adequate open space provision in Menstrie.

3.27. Both the OSS and LDP take account of open spaces and play areas that may be privately owned as through their provision, these contribute to the overall provision of such facilities within communities. The decision by Greenbelt (already a private owner) to sell play areas does not change the fact that these areas were planned and are used as community facilities for nearby residents. The change in ownership does not change the planning status of the play area as part of publicly available open space.

3.28. The SPP notes that “development of land allocated as green infrastructure for an unrelated purpose should have a strong justification.….based on evidence from relevant audits and strategies that the proposal will not result in a deficit of that type of provision within the local area and that alternative sites have been considered. Poor maintenance and neglect should not be used as a justification for development for other purposes. Development proposals that would result in or exacerbate a deficit of green infrastructure should include provision to remedy that deficit with accessible infrastructure of an appropriate type, quantity and quality.” The proposals are not supported by a justification based on any audit or strategy, and have not demonstrated that a deficit in play provision wouldn’t result from the development. The application does not therefore comply with the SPP

3.29. The Council has received 65 No. individual objections to the planning application expressing a strong local view that this is an important local community facility used by residents and should therefore be retained.

3.30. The material considerations before the Service do not therefore support the application.

3.31. Taking account of these collective considerations, the Service consider the application to be contrary to the development plan and that the key material considerations also do not support the proposal.

4.0 Sustainability Implications

4.1. The application, if approved would result in the loss of a valuable open space within a residential area of Menstrie.

5.0 Resource Implications

5.1. Financial Details

5.2. The full financial implications of the recommendations are set out in the report. This includes a reference to full life cycle costs where appropriate. Yes

36

5.3. Finance have been consulted and have agreed the financial implications as set out in the report. Yes

5.4. Staffing

6.0 Exempt Reports

6.1. Is this report exempt? Yes (please detail the reasons for exemption below) No

7.0 Declarations The recommendations contained within this report support or implement our Corporate Priorities and Council Policies.

(1) Our Priorities (Please double click on the check box )

The area has a positive image and attracts people and businesses Our communities are more cohesive and inclusive People are better skilled, trained and ready for learning and employment Our communities are safer Vulnerable people and families are supported Substance misuse and its effects are reduced Health is improving and health inequalities are reducing The environment is protected and enhanced for all The Council is effective, efficient and recognised for excellence

(2) Council Policies (Please detail)

8.0 Equalities Impact

8.1 Have you undertaken the required equalities impact assessment to ensure that no groups are adversely affected by the recommendations? Yes No

9.0 Legality

9.1 It has been confirmed that in adopting the recommendations contained in this report, the Council is acting within its legal powers. Yes

10.0 Appendices

10.1 Please list any appendices attached to this report. If there are no appendices, please state "none".

37

1. Names and Addresses of Those Making Representation

11.0 Background Papers

11.1 Have you used other documents to compile your report? (All documents must be kept available by the author for public inspection for four years from the date of meeting at which the report is considered)

Yes (please list the documents below) No Author(s)

NAME DESIGNATION TEL NO / EXTENSION

Grant Baxter Principal Planner

2615

Approved by

NAME DESIGNATION SIGNATURE

Allan Finlayson Planning & Building Standards Team Leader

Julie Hamilton

Development Services Manager

38

APPENDIX 1 – NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THOSE MAKING REPRESENTATIONS

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Menstrie Mains Residents Association

16 Willow Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DQ

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr David Beckham

2 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Denise McIntyre

3 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Jackie Gerlach

14 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

39

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

James Gaffney

14 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Gordon Pirrie

37 Birch Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DW

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr James Anderson

19 Birch Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DW

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Helen Cook

10 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

40

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Valerie Scott

1 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Michael Bray

4 Willow Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DQ

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Pamela Lister

28 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Barry Smith

17 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Jacqueline Miller

25 Birch Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DW

41

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Richard Spruce

9 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Claire Ross

9 Birch Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DW

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Laura Hollis

20 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Linda Brown

14 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

42

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Mhairi Kelly

52 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Lynsey Airs

26 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr John Gallacher

3 Alder Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DU

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Craig Simpson

18 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Lorna Tannock

8 Alder Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DU

COMMENT TYPE: O

43

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Helen Lennox

71 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

John Gourley

2 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Stephen Titterington

8 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Richard Saunders

23 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

44

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Stuart Risk

19 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Ursula Hauptmann-Smith

17 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Anne Whiteford

48 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Laura Guthrie

50 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

45

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Ian McPhail

46 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr And Mrs Haggarty

44 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Alexander Moreland

40 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Ian Mailer

36 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

46

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

R Young

34 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Miss Alison Waddell

32 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Ms Daphne Stewart

30 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Mike Marriott

28 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

47

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Julie-Ann Haythorpe

26 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Michael Tetlow

24 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Donald Macaskill

22 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Clive Bailey

15 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

48

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Peter Gilchrist

9 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Greg Kyle

13 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Rosemary Seeney

11 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Gareth Hollis

7 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

49

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Mark Richardson

20 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Mary Rawding

28 Alder Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DU

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Lorna Stevely

1 Alder Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DU

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Dale Cowan

12 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Aileen Littlejohn

16 Willow Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DQ

50

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Ms Judith Morgan

36 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Scott Macdonald

18 Pine Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DT

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Pauline Mckerracher

52 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Peter Moulding

30 Birch Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DW

COMMENT TYPE: O

51

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Stuart Baird

20 Willow Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DQ

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

J & D Simpson

1 Cedar Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DY

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Sheila MacPherson

30 Willow Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DQ

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Dr Alex Fraser

34 Holly Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DR

COMMENT TYPE: O

52

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr James Bull

56 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mrs Claire Hume

29 Blackthorn Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DX

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Ms Charline Zerbinati

27 Willow Grove

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DQ

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Iain Taylor

16 Pine Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DT

COMMENT TYPE: O

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Mr Nigel Lockwood

16 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

53

REPRESENTEE

NAME AND ADDRESS:

Miss Linda McRae

12 Rowan Crescent

Menstrie

Clackmannanshire

FK11 7DS

COMMENT TYPE: O

O = Objection

54

2

7

1

ESS

14

52

40

23

22

15

12

21

42

16

26

11

29

2

2

14

Play Area

Play Area

Drain

ROWAN CRESCENT

HAZEL AVENUE

284500

284500

284600

284600

284700

284700 6963

00

6964

00

6964

00

6965

00

6965

00

6966

00

6966

00

1:1,250Scale:

Development & EnvironmentKilncraigs

Greenside StreetAlloa

FK10 1EB

Tel: 01259 450 000planning@clacks.gov.uk

Date:08-Nov-2017

17/00210/PPP – Play Park At Rowan Crescent, MenstrieErection Of 2 No. Houses

Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right 2017.All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100020783.

Ward: Clackmannanshire North OS Grid Ref: NS 84 96 SW0 10 20 30 40

Meters

LegendApplication site boundary

55

56