DATA LABEL: PUBLIC
WEST LOTHIAN PLANNING COMMITTEE
Report by Development Management Manager
1.0
1.1
2.0
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
Planning permission in principle for a mixed use development including housing, retail, a
residential care home, a dance studio, landscaping and open space, a hotel and conference
centre, a new motorway access and associated infrastructure at Burghmuir, Linlithgow.
DETAILS
Reference no.
0095/P/12
Owner of site
Applicant
Wallace Land Investment
and Management
Ward & local
members
Case officer
Chris Norman
Contact details
Mr. R. Braes
Transport Scotland
West Lothian Council
Linlithgow
Cllr. T Conn
Cllr, M Day
Provost T. Kerr
chris.norman@westlothian.gov.uk
Reason for referral to West Lothian Planning Committee:
2.1
This is a major planning application that is significantly contrary to the development plan.
2.2
There is a requirement under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in
determining certain proposals, statutorily defined as „major‟ planning applications, that
entitles the applicant and those persons who have made representation on the
application to appear before and to be heard by a committee of the council.
2.3
In accordance with the Act the council‟s function of deciding an application of this type
shall be discharged only by full council and not a committee of the council.
2.4
A subsequent report will be presented to West Lothian Council and the application for
development at Burghmuir can then be determined.
1
3.0
RECOMMENDATION
3.1
It is recommended that West Lothian Planning Committee note the contents of this
report and the terms of all representations made, including representations by those
appearing at the hearing, prior to a decision being made on the planning application
by West Lothian Council.
4.0
THE SCOPE OF THIS REPORT
4.1
Planning permission in principle is sought for a mixed use development on 51
hectares of land in Linlithgow to the north and south of the A803 Blackness Road, as
set out on the Masterplan attached to this report in Annex 1. The land is an area of
countryside used almost exclusively for agricultural purposes. Part of the site,
required to facilitate the proposed new slip roads at Junction 3, extends into the
administrative area of Falkirk Council.
4.2
The application for planning permission in principle is, statutorily, a „major‟ planning
application. It is accompanied by an environmental impact statement and a series of
supporting reports including statements on design, transport, air quality, retail impact,
flooding, sustainability and health impacts. Each of these supporting documents, and
the report on public consultation compiled before submission of the planning
application, is available for viewing at Committee Services. The applicant has also
submitted supplementary supporting information on education, air quality, material
considerations and draft heads of agreement that would form the basis of
discussions to allow a planning obligation (a section 75 agreement) to be entered into
with the council if planning permission in principle was to be granted for the
development. These documents comprise part of the application file.
4.3
A further report to West Lothian Council will set out a recommendation on the
proposal.
5.0
THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
5.1
The site mainly comprises of class 3 prime quality agricultural land bisected by the
A803; to the north west of the site is the Oracle manufacturing premises and an area
of land allocated in the West Lothian Local Plan (WLLP) solely for an expansion to
this facility. The Burghmuir junction onto the M9 adjoins the north-eastern boundary.
To the south of Blackness Road the site borders open agricultural land adjacent to
Kingsfield. There are no environmental designations affecting the site but two listed
buildings lie adjacent to the site boundary at Burghmuir farmhouse and steading.
5.2
Specifically, planning permission in principle is sought for the following land uses:
Residential development comprising some 600 new homes of which 15 - 25%
will comprise „affordable housing‟;
Land for a medium sized foodstore – originally, 5,600sqm gross retail floorspace,
later reduced to 3,716 sqm gross, with 500 parking spaces and petrol filling
station; (members should note on April 5th the applicants advised that they would
accept a condition that limited the size of the retail unit to 500sqm);
Land for a new health centre;
Land for a 60 bed care home;
Land for a 60 bed hotel including conferencing facilities and coach parking;
2
West bound slips at Junction 3 on the M9 junction;
Land for sports and leisure uses on 3.2 hectares. This area will accommodate a
dance studio and sports pitches.
In addition to construction jobs the applicant considers that there would be some 500
permanent jobs created in the hotel, supermarket, health centre and care home.
Some £90m would be directly committed to the delivery of the implementation and
delivery of the project.
The residential component
5.3
The applicant seeks planning permission in principle for “at least” 600 residential
units and a residential care home. The applicant has since clarified that the maximum
number of houses to be built would be capped at 600. The residential component
which would, according to the applicant, be socially inclusive and have a range of
tenure mix, will be on both sides of the A803, interspersed with access roads, open
space and landscaping. The applicant would wish to phase this part of the
development over 10 years, with up to 30 affordable homes being delivered every 2
years.
5.4
The applicant has indicated a willingness to agree a procurement strategy for
affordable housing with the council which will lead to the provision of 150 (25%)
affordable houses, although this percentage may be reduced to 15% if contributions
for non-denominational secondary school provision were required.
5.5
The Design Statement submitted with the application describes the form that the
residential component would take. A central area of open space in the northern part
of the site would become a focal point. A mix of house styles and tenures would be
built; all homes would be within 400m of a bus stop and a safe route to school could
be provided from Burghmuir to Springfield Primary School. A detailed landscape
framework would be established to enhance the quality of the new residential
environment to be built; there would be an open space hierarchy and a linear
greenspace corridor would be provided on the south of the Blackness Road. The
proposal would be designed to be compliant with the council‟s residential design
guide.
5.6
Buildings would be set back from Blackness Road to enhance the setting of the
development and protect the character of the eastern approach into Linlithgow. A
„boulevard‟ would separate the northern residential component from the mixed use
area.
The Neighbourhood Centre
5.7
The Masterplan submitted with the application allocates a neighbourhood centre in
the western most part of the northern site.
5.8
Within the neighbourhood centre there is provision for a “medium sized” supermarket
north of Blackness Road in the eastern part of the site. The application initially
advised that this would be a 60,000sq.ft. (5,600sq.m) building with a petrol filling
station and a long stay car park. Car parking would lie between the supermarket
building and Blackness Road.
5.9
The applicant has subsequently amended the proposals to reduce the size of the
supermarket to 40,000sq.ft (3,716sqm). Immediately prior to the compilation of this
3
report the applicant advised that he would accept a condition limiting the retail
component to 500sqm.
5.10
Elsewhere in the neighbourhood centre the Masterplan identifies locations for a hotel
with conferencing facilities with approximately 60 beds, a coach park, a care home
and a site for a new health centre. It is understood that there are no firm
commitments to develop these proposed facilities by potential operators at this point
in time.
5.11
A community park would be situated between the supermarket and the hotel.
The M9 Junction 3 Upgrade
5.12
Integral to the proposal is the construction of new west-facing slip roads at junction 3
of the M9. Planning permission in principle has been granted for that part of the
junction upgrade lying in Falkirk Council‟s area. The construction of the slips will
require to be subject to detailed planning approval and to relevant consents from
Transport Scotland. Their construction will require extensive earthworks and a
comprehensive landscape treatment. It is understood that initially the slips would be
funded from the capital receipt of the sale of land for the food store and be fully
functional before any development is occupied, if the development as submitted were
to proceed. The developer has since confirmed that the slips would be built even in
the event of the retail provision being reduced to 500sqm, but this would have a
consequent impact for funding of education provision at Winchburgh.
The Business Park
5.13
6.0
The Masterplan submitted with the planning application shows a future business park
north-west of the site boundary and outwith the application site, but serviced by a
new link from within the application site. The WLLP sees this land allocation as being
solely for the purposes of the expansion of the adjacent Oracle facility.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL
6.1
The planning application is accompanied by an environmental impact statement
(EIS). Additional information relating to the revised air quality assessment has been
received and has been subject to additional statutory publicity. A copy of the EIS and
non technical summary is available to members from Committee Services.
6.2
Annex 2 of this report provides a summary of the environmental impacts that would
ensue if the development were to proceed.
7.0
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Consultee
West of Scotland
Archaeology Service
Objection
Yes
Comments
The site has a number of
significant archaeological features
and a condition to record these
prior to development commencing
ought to be imposed.
Falkirk Council
Yes
The council objects to the
proposed supermarket, even at
the lesser scale of 3,716 sqm,
4
Planning Response
The matters could be
addressed by a
planning condition if
planning permission in
principle was to be
granted.
The improvements to
Junction 3 of the M9
are a positive benefit of
Linlithgow &
Linlithgow Bridge
Community Council
Inconclusive
Historic Scotland
No
Scottish Water
No
NHS Lothian
No
Scottish Natural
Heritage
No
due to the potential impact on the
vitality and viability of Bo‟ness
town centre. Falkirk Council
supports and welcomes the
improvements to the motorway
junction.
The community council has been
an integral part of the preapplication consultation process
carried out by the applicant and
recognises the extent of
community debate about the
proposals, varying from significant
opposition to support. The
community council notes that a
planning permission here may
compromise the positive
consideration of the other sites
that may come forward in the
development planning process.
The community council
recognises that a static planning
policy, restraining growth, is no
longer a valid option for the town.
The current proposal addresses
some concerns particularly with
regard to jobs and the facilities
proposed for the neighbourhood
centre. The community council
also notes the visual impact in the
eastern part of the town, the use
of prime agricultural land,
additional traffic, education
provision, the inadequacy of the
location of the proposed health
centre and the impact on the town
centre. The community council
would wish further studies in
order to reach a conclusion in
which the community council and
the community as a whole can be
confident.
No objection is made; there will
not be significant indirect impacts
on cultural heritage assets.
No objection, subject to technical
approvals and the completion of a
development impact assessment
Various comments are made on
the health impact assessment
and mitigation is needed if the
development were to proceed
No objection as, subject to
mitigation, there will be no
5
the scheme. The
matter of retailing is
addressed elsewhere in
this report.
Noted. These matters
are addressed
elsewhere in the report.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted. These matters
are addressed
West Lothian
Council: Housing
No
West Lothian
Council: Education
Yes
West Lothian
Council:
Environmental
Health
No
West Lothian
Council:
Transportation
No
adverse impact on sites
designated for their ecological
interest. In landscape terms the
layout of the site must protect
views to Linlithgow‟s historic core
necessitating detailed
consideration at the design stage;
mitigation must safeguard
protected species and access
should be allowed for.
To be approved the proposals
must accord with policy HOU 10
of the West Lothian Local Plan.
Housing‟s preference would be
for the donation of parcels of land
of 30 – 40 units capacity adjacent
to proposed local amenities with
an early release of the sites
required.
The proposed development is a
windfall site and such sites can
only be supported if there is
reasonable expected capacity
within schools to accommodate
the proposed development plus
development that is already
committed and development sites
that are allocated in the adopted
or emerging development plans.
Education planning object to the
proposal. .
Comments are made about air
quality caused by additional traffic
and the development would have
a neutral impact generally when
the additional traffic is balanced
with the provision of new
motorway slips.
The site is not well suited from an
accessibility and sustainability
perspective and air quality issues
must be addressed; however no
objections are made subject to
conditions that the new motorway
slips are complete before
occupation of the first house; a
subsidy is made for local busses
serving the development; that
design of the infrastructure
leading to the motorway junction
is approved by the council as
roads authority and
miscellaneous considerations on
speed limits and traffic signals.
6
elsewhere in the report.
Noted.
Noted. These matters
are addressed
elsewhere in the report.
Noted. These matters
are addressed
elsewhere in the report.
Noted. These matters
are addressed
elsewhere in the report.
A suspensive condition
could require the
construction of the slips
prior to the occupation
of the development if
planning permission in
principle was to be
granted and the
applicant has confirmed
his willingness to this.
Transport Scotland
8.0
No
No objections to the proposals but Noted. These matters
subject to the west bound slips
are addressed
being functional prior to the
elsewhere in the report.
occupation of the development.
A suspensive condition
could require the
construction of the slips
prior to the occupation
of the development if
planning permission in
principle was to be
granted and the
applicant has confirmed
his willingness to this.
PUBLIC REPRESENTATION
8.1
Statutory publicity has been afforded to the application and environmental impact
statement and additional advertising has been carried out in terms of the revised air
quality and retail information submitted.
8.2
A total of 1161 individual representations were received in respect of the application,
1090 objecting to the proposal and 71 in support of the application.
8.3
The following table summarises the main points of the objections including those
submitted by Linlithgow Civic Trust and Burgh Beautiful Linlithgow. Full copies of the
letters are available for inspection from Committee Services.
Objection comment
Planning response
The retail component of the
development would have a
negative effect on the retail
character of the High Street
and worsen the shopping
environment
and
the
viability of other existing
shops.
Members should note that the majority of objections to the
supermarket relate to the original larger proposal. A retail
consult employed by the council to assess the impact of the
proposal identifies that the proposed supermarket, even at a
reduced scale of 3,716 sqm, if implemented together with the
extension to the foodstore at the Regent Centre, which the
council is minded to grant, would have a detrimental impact on
the vitality and viability of Linlithgow and Bo‟ness town centres.
Falkirk Council is objecting to the proposal on retail impact
grounds.
Impact
on
educational The council‟s education service considers that there is
services
insufficient school capacity to serve the development. The
land required to overcome the capacity issues is not in the
control of the applicant.
Impact on the setting and The loss of the farmland between the town and the motorway
small
country
town at this scale would undoubtedly have a visual and landscape
character of Linlithgow
impact on the eastern approach to the town reducing the
landscape character of this otherwise undeveloped approach
which affords extensive views over the surrounding
countryside. It would effect the „small country town‟ feel of this
approach to the town. The applicants have stated that they
would ensure that the view of the steeple at St Michaels‟
7
Relocation of health centre
Traffic impact
Impact
on
local
infrastructure
(including
parking within the town,
health facilities etc)
Church on this approach would be protected.
The applicant proposes to allocate land to allow for the
relocation of the health centre, but any decision on whether to
relocate it from its current position in the centre of town will be
for the Group Medical Practice. It is agreed that this would be a
less accessible location for much of the existing population of
the town, and that it would be less sustainable in terms of
access than the existing location in the centre of the town.
The council‟s Transportation service has considered the
applicant‟s Transport Assessment, which shows, at peak times,
some beneficial effects in terms of traffic impact from the
proposed development. This is because the increase in the
numbers of vehicles generated by the development would be
balanced by the decrease in through traffic brought about by
the construction of the motorway slip roads. However, traffic
may increase may increase during the day, outwith the peaks.
The council‟s Transportation Service agrees with the
conclusions of the applicant‟s transport assessment.
The additional numbers of residents potentially using the local
station would add to pressure for parking spaces. The
applicant‟s suggestion that the parking provided at the
foodstore/hotel would be attractive as a car park serving the
town is not supported by the council‟s Transportation service,
on the grounds that it would be approximately a mile from the
railway station.
The proposal is significantly contrary to the development plan.
Contrary to Development
Plan
Loss of agricultural land
The proposal would result in the loss of prime quality
agricultural land.
Location of hotel
Most comments relating to the proposed hotel expressed the
opinion that the hotel would not benefit Linlithgow but would be
seen more as a motorway service area.
Impact on tourism
The proposed development would impact on the setting of the
town when approaching from the east and this would reduce its
attractiveness as a small town with an historic centre
surrounded by attractive countryside, which separates it from
the motorway network.
Development
is
not The proposed foodstore and the site for the health centre
sustainable
would be approximately a mile from the town centre so they
are not sustainable in that it would discourage walking,
although the applicants are offering public transport
contributions to ensure that the development is linked to the
town by enhanced public transport links. The majority of the
site would require children to be bussed to the catchment nondenominational secondary school.
Impact on air quality
The air quality assessment produced by the applicant has
demonstrated that, with the motorway slips in place, the
development would have a neutral impact on air quality overall,
although the emission levels at Low Port would increase
slightly.
Impact
on Scottish Natural Heritage has raised no objections to the
environment/biodiversity
proposal. The habitat study submitted with the application
confirms that there are no protected species present in or near
the application site which would be affected. SNH propose
8
Location of care home
conditions which would safeguard ecological concerns.
Some objectors take the view that a location a mile from the
town centre would be an inappropriate location for a care
home. Given the enhanced public transport links which the
applicants have confirmed that they would contribute to, the
proposed location of the care home is considered to be
appropriate within the context of the entire development.
8.4
Members should note that the lead developer of the Winchburgh Core Development
Area, Regenco, has objected to the planning application and set out a wide range of
concerns that largely coincide with the wider representations summarised above.
However the Winchburgh developer in particular considers that the proposal is
contrary to national, strategic and local planning policy and it would place at severe
risk the Core Development Area strategy fundamental to the delivery of housing,
education and other infrastructure development necessary to accommodate growth in
West Lothian. Salient to the consideration of the application at Burghmuir is the
effects that it would have on the council‟s development plan strategy.
8.5
The table below summarises the main points made in representations which are in
support of the proposals. Full copies of the letters are available through Committee
Services.
Comment
New/improved recreation
and leisure facilities
New housing
Motorway slips
Some letters of support
give the opinion that the
financial health of
Linlithgow and its
attractiveness to visitors
would improve with the
additional spending power
of the new residents. In
addition, the proposed hotel
and care home are
welcomed by some.
Planning response
The Masterplan shows a 3.2 hectare area for sports and
leisure uses, and the planning statement confirms that land for
a dance studio would be made available through the planning
process. Many of the letters in support of the proposal
specifically refer to the proposed dance studio.
The proposals include 600 new houses, including affordable
housing. It is agreed that the proposed development would
increase housing choice and availability in Linlithgow.
The proposed motorway slips are welcomed as an
improvement to the connectivity of the town to the motorway
network.
Whilst there would be benefits from the development these do
not offset the development presumption against the proposal.
9
9.0
9.1
ASSESSMENT
The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 requires that the determination
of the Burghmuir planning application must be made in accordance with development
plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In other words if the proposal
does not accord with the development plan, it should be refused unless there are
material considerations indicating that it should be granted. The development plan in
this case is the Edinburgh and Lothian‟s Structure Plan 2015 and the West Lothian
Local Plan 2009. For practical purposes and for ease of reading this section of the
report is not presented in a tabular form.
The Edinburgh and Lothian’s Structure Plan 2015
9.2
Approved in June 2004, the Edinburgh and the Lothian‟s Structure Plan 2015 (ELSP)
is a key part of the development plan. Its replacement, the strategic development
plan, is at an advanced stage as the proposed plan is at examination but does not
form part of the development plan.
ELSP Housing Policy
9.3
The ELSP requires Lothian councils to maintain an effective five year housing land
supply. In seeking to achieve this the ELSP identified a series of core development
areas (CDA‟s) including, in West Lothian, Armadale, Winchburgh and Livingston and
the Almond Valley. Policy HOU 3 of the ELSP requires that land for a minimum of
7,000 dwellings be allocated within West Lothian, and the land for these new
dwellings is to be found within the three CDA‟s. The West Lothian Local Plan (WLLP)
allocates land for 12,000 houses in these CDAs and therefore the structure plan
strategic housing allocations have been allocated to the maximum permitted and well
above the minimum requirement. Since the WLLP was adopted, the council has
granted planning permission for 7,150 houses within the CDAs. This is more than the
minimum required and equates to around 60% of the maximum 12,000 houses
permitted by the ELSP. Applications for some of the balance up to the maximum
continue to be progressed by the council.
9.4
Paragraph 2.50 of the ELSP identifies Linlithgow as an area of restraint due to
infrastructure, landscape and environmental objectives. The proposal is significantly
contrary to this part of the structure plan.
9.5
Importantly, ELSP Policy HOU5 states that the development of housing land should
not proceed beyond the existing infrastructure capacity of each site until the required
improvements are provided or committed. It is thus important to set out the education
position in relation to the current proposal to address the degree of compliance with
this policy of the structure plan.
ELSP Housing policy and the implications for education provision
Background
9.6
From an Education Planning perspective, the proposed development is a „windfall
site‟ as defined by the Edinburgh & Lothians Structure Plan. Education Planning take
the view that windfall sites can only be supported if there is reasonable expected
capacity within schools to accommodate the windfall development, plus development
which is already committed and development sites which are allocated in adopted or
emerging development plans. Forecasting used by Education Planning in this
assessment has taken a conservative approach to anticipated pupil numbers and in
10
practice estimated numbers could well be greater. This approach is consistent with
the approach set out in the council‟s current SPG Planning for Education.
Primary School Matters
9.7
The development site straddles 3 non-denominational primary school catchment
boundaries, Bridgend, Lowport and Springfield. It would, therefore, be necessary to
undertake a school consultation to determine appropriate non-denominational
primary school arrangements given the circumstances of all 3 primary schools
including school capacity feasibility studies as only Springfield Primary School has
current capacity. As the application is for planning permission in principle the scale of
development that Springfield Primary School could support would need further
clarification if planning permission is to be granted. Furthermore, it should be noted
that the outcome of the school consultation cannot be pre-empted. Members should
note that pre-school needs are assumed as part of the primary school requirements.
9.8
The denominational primary school for the development site is St Joseph‟s Primary
School, located within the same campus as Linlithgow Primary and Linlithgow
Academy. The capacity of all these schools must be considered together in terms of
statutory guidance and regulation. It is considered that the overall campus pupil
maximum is already reached and that there is no scope for further capacity
increases. There is also concern about the stated capacity at St Joseph‟s Primary
School, particularly if the roll rises above current levels as a result of new housing
development. The listed school capacity has not been reviewed since the mid 1990‟s
and the current school accommodation would not meet current guidance and
regulatory needs. The scale of development that St Joseph‟s Primary School could
support would need further clarification if planning permission is to be granted (i.e.
through a school capacity feasibility study). Again members should note that preschool needs are assumed as part of the primary school requirements.
9.9
Thus, provided the feasibility studies demonstrate that the required extensions are
technically possible, and depending on developer contributions being paid, there may
be technical solutions to primary school capacity shortfalls that would facilitate
support of the proposed development, at least in part. However, full support of the
development in primary school terms is dependent on a statutory process that cannot
be pre-empted.
9.10
The applicant has agreed in principle to these contributions being paid with the final
cost for primary school infrastructure being finalised once design work has concluded
and the necessary works are tendered.
Contributions for primary school
infrastructure would need to be paid at an early stage to ensure that additional
capacity could be provided in time to support the build out of the proposed
development.
9.11
A solution to mitigate ongoing school transport costs is also required. In the absence
of an agreed school consultation, ongoing transport assistance would be required for
Bridgend Primary School and St Joseph‟s Primary School, given that the primary
schools are more than 1.5 miles from the application site.
9.12
In summary, it is not possible to support the full Burghmuir application within present
non-denominational primary school arrangements. If the development was to be
supported it could be possible to condition the application so that part of the
development within the Springfield Primary School catchment area is allowed to
progress in advance of a wider non-denominational primary school consultation
(assuming there are no other primary school capacity restrictions i.e. that there is
11
resolution of capacity issues at St. Joseph‟s Primary School). However, housing
development within the current catchments of Bridgend and Lowport Primary Schools
could not progress until a school consultation with supporting school feasibility
studies is undertaken, as this will determine the scale of residential development that
can be supported. The feasibility studies and school consultation would have to be
developer funded.
9.13
It is also not possible to support the Burghmuir application within present
denominational primary school arrangements. It is considered that with the capacity
as listed a technical solution to address current accommodation shortfalls would be
possible as effectively accommodation improvements could make the current listed
capacity appropriate to current guidance and regulation. It should be noted that it
may still not be possible to increase the capacity at St Joseph‟s Primary School,
given the overall school site restriction. Thus, there would also be a requirement to
regulate the development to available denominational primary school capacity and
commensurate with non-denominational primary school capacity. The feasibility
study and subsequent extension/adaptation works would have to be developer
funded. If the council was minded to support the application it would be appropriate
to attach a planning condition that prevented any house occupations in advance of St
Joseph‟s Primary School being extended to support the Burghmuir development in
part and in full within the context of the noted non-denominational primary school
consultation.
Secondary School Matters
9.14
In a report to the council‟s Education Executive in October 2012 entitled „Strategy for
School Consultations‟ it was confirmed that capacity at Linlithgow Academy is
allocated to development that is compliant with the West Lothian Local Plan, at
Westfield and Winchburgh, for which there are signed section 75 planning
agreements and, as such, the available capacity of Linlithgow Academy remains a
constraint to further development. That report also confirms that it would not be
possible to support medium or large scale development in Linlithgow based on
current forecasts until such time as development at Winchburgh has progressed to
the extent that a new non-denominational secondary school is committed and
underway. On this basis it is not possible to support any additional development
other than that identified in the forecast (audit and local plan base) across the
Linlithgow Academy catchment area without a very significant change in
demographic and planning circumstances. These concerns could be removed if a
new non-denominational secondary school was built at Winchburgh and the
catchment area for that school included Winchburgh Primary School. This would
allow school children from Winchburgh to attend the new non-denominational
secondary school, thereby releasing capacity within the Linlithgow Academy
catchment area. However, the location of the new school, it‟s catchment area and
the arrangements for establishing the new school would all be subject to statutory
school consultation requirements. As noted above the outcome of this cannot be
pre-empted, even though the approved Masterplan for the Winchburgh CDA includes
a secondary school site noted as a joint campus and, presently, under control of the
Winchburgh CDA developers.
9.15
Education Planning has similar concerns that the proposal will result in school
capacity problems at St Kentigern‟s Academy. These concerns could be removed if
a new denominational secondary school was built at Winchburgh and the catchment
area for that school included St Joseph‟s Primary School. This would allow school
children from St Joseph‟s to attend the new denominational secondary school,
12
thereby reducing the catchment demand on St Kentigern‟s Academy. This would
require a formal school consultation and as noted above, this cannot be pre-empted.
9.16
A solution to mitigate ongoing school transport costs is also required. Ongoing
transport assistance would be required for Linlithgow Academy and St Kentigern‟s
Academy as the secondary schools are more than 2 miles distant from the
application site.
9.17
If implemented, the proposals for new school secondary school provision in
Winchburgh could lead to an increase in secondary school capacity. Secondary
school capacity may also become available through unforeseen demographic decline
and/or a substantial change to planning circumstances of the major residential
developments proposed. There could be competing interests for any capacity freed
up as a result. The local development plan is the appropriate place to consider any
such competing interests.
9.18
If the council was minded to support the application it would be appropriate to
consider building in an Education Review clause into the S75 agreement that would
control the rate and scale of residential development to the available education
infrastructure and to secure the necessary planning obligations to overcome the
education constraints. It is important to note that the outcome of a school
consultation under the terms of the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010
cannot be pre-empted.
9.19
Given the concerns about capacity problems at the current primary catchment
schools, Bridgend, Lowport, Springfield and St Joseph‟s and the current secondary
catchment schools Linlithgow and St Kentigern‟s, and the uncertainty about how
these concerns will be addressed, the proposal is contrary to Policy HOU 5 in the
ESLP.
Other Education Matters
9.20
The council has already taken measures to support the development plan and secure
appropriate ongoing secondary school places. Specifically, the council has forward
funded an extension at Linlithgow Academy at a cost of £1,275,460 with the intention
of recovering its costs. The Winchburgh CDA developer has paid £1,275,460
(indexed) to the council as an interim non-denominational secondary school
contribution but it is written into the planning agreement for the Winchburgh CDA that
payment of this sum may represent an overpayment in respect of the nondenominational secondary school contribution and that the council will either (a)
offset such overpayment against future contributions or (b) use their best endeavours
to facilitate the repayment of such overpayments to the relevant payer out of
contributions in respect of non-denominational secondary school provision received
by the council from other developers.
9.21
This approach was taken as the Winchburgh CDA developer was not in a position to
fund a new non-denominational secondary school at the beginning of their
development. It was agreed that up to 550 residential units could be occupied at the
Winchburgh CDA before a new non-denominational secondary school was
constructed at Winchburgh provided an interim non-denominational secondary school
contribution was paid as the first 550 residential units at Winchburgh could not have
proceeded if the council had not forwarded funded additional capacity at Linlithgow
Academy, the current catchment non-denominational secondary school for
Winchburgh.
13
9.22
The use of capacity at Linlithgow Academy for the Winchburgh CDA development is
anticipated to be a short term, interim arrangement, until a new non-denominational
secondary school is constructed at Winchburgh. Other developers in the catchment
of Linlithgow Academy could therefore later benefit from the additional capacity
forward funded by the council at Linlithgow Academy as capacity is again likely to
become available once a new non-denominational secondary school is constructed
at Winchburgh to serve the CDA development.
9.23
Therefore, having regard to the fact that the council forward funded the extension at
Linlithgow Academy with a view to recovering the costs, and the provisions of the
Winchburgh CDA planning agreement regarding the payment of an interim nondenominational secondary school contribution which may represent an overpayment
in respect of non-denominational secondary school contributions, there is an
expectation that developers within the Linlithgow Academy catchment area will make
a contribution for the additional capacity provided at that school. This is so that the
council recovers its costs and the Winchburgh CDA developer contributes only to the
cost of providing a new non-denominational secondary school at Winchburgh, as
envisaged in the WLLP.
9.24
Since June 2008, the council has been seeking developer contributions for Linlithgow
Academy from housing developments within the Linlithgow Academy catchment
area.
9.25
Given the scale of the Burghmuir development, a contribution towards the proposed
new non-denominational secondary school at Winchburgh may be appropriate, given
that the opening of that school would free up capacity at Linlithgow Academy to allow
the Burghmuir development to go ahead.
9.26
It should be noted that the first £1,275,460 collected for non-denominational
secondary school infrastructure within the catchment area for Linlithgow Academy
will either be returned to the Winchburgh CDA developer or will be allocated towards
the cost of providing a new non-denominational secondary school at Winchburgh with
the amount credited towards the amount due to be paid by the Winchburgh CDA
developers for this facility.
9.27
Members should note that it is understood that the applicant is willing to make
contributions towards the denominational secondary school in accordance with the
requirements set out in SPG, which provides for the option of extending St Margaret‟s
Academy and/or the provision of a new denominational secondary school at
Winchburgh.
9.28
Members should also note that it is understood that the applicant is willing to make
contributions towards the delivery of a new non-denominational secondary school at
Winchburgh. However, this would necessitate affordable housing requirements at
Burghmuir being reduced to 15%, although that contribution level would accord with
the council‟s policy as set out in the WLLP and SPG.
9.29 It was initially understood from correspondence from the applicant in March 2013 that
the contribution to a new secondary school at Winchburgh is also subject to planning
permission being granted for the 3,716sqm supermarket that is proposed within the
Burghmuir site. The applicant has since advised that if the scale of retail
development at Burghmuir was reduced to 500sqm to accord with the council‟s
retailing policy then a contribution of some limited funding after 100 homes could be
feasible depending on the timing, quantum and phasing required by the council as
part of agreed triggers.
14
9.30
In the decision making process weight requires to be given to the planning obligation
proposal because the more developments that are in a position to make contributions
towards the cost of providing new secondary schools, the better will be the prospects
of new secondary schools being delivered to support the existing development plan
strategy.
9.31
However, it should be noted that proposed contributions from Burghmuir will not
guarantee delivery of a new non-denominational secondary school at Winchburgh as
contributions will also be required from CDA developers at Winchburgh and Broxburn
to ensure that there is a fully funded proposal for a new school. Presently control of
the site proposed for secondary schools in the Winchburgh Masterplan remains with
the Winchburgh CDA developers. An actual cost for the first phase of new secondary
school provision in Winchburgh has not yet been established and it is not clear
whether the proposed scale of contribution from the Burghmuir developer is
appropriate and/or will make a material difference to the timescale for delivering new
secondary school provision.
9.32
At the present time, funding is not in place to deliver a new non denominational
secondary school at Winchburgh and it is possible that development will not progress
beyond the 550 residential units at Winchburgh which the council has agreed can be
supported in advance of a new non-denominational secondary school being opened
there. It is also the case that the 3,716sqm retail element of the Burghmuir proposal,
as set out below, is not acceptable in planning terms. Therefore, the applicant‟s
proposal to make a contribution to the cost of a new secondary school at Winchburgh
has to be seen in that context.
9.33
It should be noted that the conditions on the Winchburgh consent allow the numbers
of houses that can be occupied in advance of a new non denominational secondary
school being provided to be increased if capacity is available at Linlithgow Academy
and if the council so agrees.
9.34
Whilst the site for the proposed 550 houses at Westfield is shown as a constrained
site within the latest Housing Land Audit 2012 because there has been no immediate
developer interest, the owner has recently confirmed his intention to implement the
permission before its expiry date, and the fact remains that there is an extant
planning permission which could be implemented with a site start before 4 August
2015. The time period of the permission could also be extended or secured through
modest site works. The council must have regard to this possibility when assessing
the potential education implications of the proposed development at Burghmuir.
9.35
The applicant has submitted a paper entitled „Managing Education Risk‟. This
document, which is available from Committee Services, has been studied but does
not give sufficient grounds to set aside the concerns of Education Planning for the
reasons‟ described elsewhere in this section.
9.36
To the applicant the contributions offered to the construction of the new denomination
secondary school ought to overcome the capacity constraint at Linlithgow Academy.
However the developer at Winchburgh, Regenco, has objected to the planning
application.
The development of Winchburgh CDA fully accords with the
development plan strategy and that at Burghmuir is in conflict with that strategy. A
planning condition could be imposed restricting residential development at Burghmuir
until there was education capacity but this is likely to mean that the site at Burghmuir
would not be effective and therefore not be able to meet current structure plan
housing land requirements.
15
9.37
The problems with infrastructure funding and delivery have been reported at various
times to the Council Executive since 2008. Whilst the council has taken some steps
to assist with the delivery of infrastructure through its Local Infrastructure Fund, the
resources in this fund could not deliver a new secondary school anywhere within
West Lothian. Substantial developer contributions will be necessary if new secondary
schools are to proceed. There is no scope to extend Linlithgow Academy further
because of the limitations of the site size.
9.38 The council‟s „Planning for Education‟ SPG is also a material consideration and is
relevant to the assessment of the application. The key principles for developer
contributions set out in this SPG allow the council to accumulate developer
contributions in a fund and to defer the start of development until there is enough
funding in place to deliver the school infrastructure required to support several
developments that rely on the same education infrastructure solution.
9.39
In order for the council to support the Burghmuir proposal with appropriate developer
contributions and with the approach set out in its SPG there would require to be
suspensive conditions that precluded any development until such times as
appropriate primary school arrangements could be put in place in Linlithgow, and,
new secondary school provision was available at Winchburgh which could alleviate
the pressure on the school rolls of Linlithgow Academy and St Kentigern‟s Academy.
A solution to mitigate ongoing school transport costs is also required. In the absence
of an agreed school consultation, ongoing transport assistance would be required for
Bridgend Primary School, St Joseph‟s Primary School, Linlithgow Academy and St
Kentigern‟s Academy as the secondary schools are more than 2 miles distant from
the application site and the primary schools more than 1.5 miles from the application
site.
9.40
It should be noted that even if an education solution could be found this in itself would
not change the fact that the application is significantly contrary to the development
plan. An education solution would not be sufficient justification to set aside the terms
of the development plan.
ELSP other housing policy implications
9.41
ELSP Policy HOU6 states that contributions will be required from housing developers
to remedy any deficiencies in local facilities and amenities, which result from the
additional housing. The applicant‟s proposals include the provision of coach parking
and 100 long stay car parking spaces and these are potentially beneficial aspects of
the proposed development.
9.42
The proposal is significantly contrary to ELSP Policy HOU8 because it involves
development on greenfield land which is not required to meet policies HOU 1 or HOU
3 of the structure plan. Furthermore, the development is not being brought in a local
plan, is not small scale and all infrastructure required to support the development is
not committed. As such the proposal is not supported as an exception to the
presumption against new housing development on greenfield sites.
16
ELSP Housing land supply policies
9.43
ELSP Policies HOU1 and HOU3 set out the main categories of housing sites which
are expected to contribute to the five year housing land supply. The plan states that
the Lothian councils will maintain a five year supply for Edinburgh and the Lothians
by supporting the development of housing land consistent with the plan strategy.
9.44
Additionally, Policy HOU10 provides that where a council‟s contribution to the
effective five-year supply falls below 90% of its expected contribution and the shortfall
in the Lothian wide housing land supply is also more than 10%, that council will bring
forward additional land. In West Lothian any such land is to be found within CDA‟s or,
in accordance with Policy HOU9, settlements in the west of West Lothian. Linlithgow
does not meet either of these criteria. Therefore, bringing forward additional housing
land at Burghmuir would be contrary to Policy HOU10.
9.45
Annual monitoring reports on housing land supply are approved by the Edinburgh
and Lothians Structure Plan Joint Liaison Committee (JLC). The latest Annual
Housing Monitor (AHM), based on the 2010 Housing Land Audit, was considered and
approved by the JLC in August 2011. The AHM noted that all council areas did not
achieve an effective 5-year housing land supply, but the monitor did not recommend
the release of additional housing land on the basis that it was infrastructure
constraints and the lack of mortgage finance, rather than the availability of allocated
housing land that had led to this situation. Although a further monitoring report has
not been produced the fact remains that economic circumstances are challenging
and in the council‟s view this remains the key constraint to housing output, rather
than the availability of land.
9.46
In October 2011 the council endorsed the position of the JLC. Since then the council
executive has not considered housing land supply issues in detail although it did
approve Housing Recovery Action Plans in 2012 and 2013 which identified various
actions to speed up the rate of house building in West Lothian.
9.47 The ELSP sets out a number of sources of housing land to meet a total requirement of
70,200 new dwellings (16,100 in West Lothian), the majority of which come from and
are already identified through the planning system. The WLLP was adopted shortly
after the beginning of the current recession and the UK economy has experienced
continuing economic problems since then. As a consequence of this and the
economic difficulties the country faces, annual housing output in West Lothian post
credit crunch has been substantially lower than it was before. In West Lothian, annual
completions from the base date of the current structure plan show that housing
output reached a high of 1,288 completions in 2004/05 to a low of 229 completions in
2011/12. There is a modest recovery in housing output during 2012/13 with 497
completions.
9.48
Since the adoption of the WLLP housing development has started at Armadale CDA,
Winchburgh CDA and Heartlands. The council has also granted planning permission
for the 2,300 houses at Calderwood CDA. The council is also minded to grant
planning permission for 625 houses at Drumshoreland subject to a legal agreement
being concluded
9.49
On the basis of current build rates, it is highly improbable that housing delivery will
meet the ESLP housing land requirement.
17
9.50
There have been 9,193 completions in West Lothian up to 2012, leaving a balance of
6,907 to be achieved before 2015. This would require a level of completions which
was greater than has ever been achieved in the area since the base date of the
1994 structure plan. Additionally, since the structure plan requirement is to be met
within the plan period, of which there are now only three years remaining, the new
annual target should be calculated and expressed over the three remaining years,
and not over a five year period.
9.51
The effective 5-year housing land supply in West Lothian currently stands at 3,418
units and the number of houses programmed for development over the subsequent
five years, the effective (post 5-year) housing land supply, is 9,876 units. When
added together this produces a remaining effective housing land supply figure of
13,294. The total effective supply in the 2012 Audit is 14,281.
9.52 The short term land supply is low, principally due to a significant reduction in demand
and lack of available finance affecting both potential house buyers ability to obtain a
mortgage and the development industry's ability to borrow to commence
development, as well as the rate of completions / sales that can be achieved.
9.53
At Burghmuir both Transport Scotland and WLC Transportation require that no
houses can be occupied before the west bound motorway slips are available. Any
alternative scenario of allowing, say, 250 houses to be built without the slips has not
been tested in terms of traffic impact or air quality. The availability of the slips may
not be for around four years because of the need for their detailed planning
permission after the issue of planning permission in principle and the completion of
any s75 agreement for the Burghmuir development as a whole and thereafter the
promotion of the necessary Roads Orders before beginning the tendering process
and the completion of construction. Hence the Burghmuir site will not make an early
contribution to housing output even if all aspects of the proposal were acceptable.
Crucially the housing at Burghmuir will not contribute to the structure plan
requirement to 2015.
9.54
Consequently, even if it was accepted that additional land is required to be brought
forward to increase housing output in the short term, the Burghmuir site would not be
able to make any significant contribution over the five year period given the need for
new west bound slip roads at J3 of the M9 which could in the council‟s view take
around 4 years to deliver, coupled with the education constraints set out earlier.
ELSP Transport Policy
9.55
The westbound slips at Burghmuir on the M9 are not specifically identified in the
ELSP as key transport and investment proposals to be safeguarded pending
decisions by stakeholders on implementation. However, the provision of the
motorway slips is a benefit from the development, if it were to proceed.
ELSP Retail Policy
9.56
ELSP policy RET1 requires a sequential approach to the location of new retail
development depending on the availability of suitable opportunities within the
expected catchment area of the proposed development.
9.57
The ELSP does not identify the Burghmuir site as a location that should be
considered as an appropriate one for a town centre, commercial centre or a new local
centre. The application site is not a planned urban area identified by the development
plan. While ELSP policy RET5 part f allows development plans and other initiatives to
18
make appropriate provision for new local shopping facilities, this is only in relation to
areas of planned housing growth. As such, the applicant‟s local centre proposal is not
supported by the ELSP, as the identification of such a centre is to be plan led. The
proposal conflicts with the retail policies of the ELSP.
ELSP Environmental Policy
9.58
The site is prime quality agricultural land. It is thus in an area of constraint and ELSP
policy ENV1D requires that development affecting such interests will only be
permitted where it can be demonstrated that the objectives and overall integrity of the
designated area will not be compromised or the social or economic benefits to be
gained from the proposed development outweigh the conservation or other interest of
the site. The loss of prime quality land would conflict with the area of restraint extant
at Linlithgow and the loss of this resource requires to be assessed in the context of
the local development plan.
9.59
ELSP Policy ENV3 identifies circumstances where development in the countryside
will be supported. The proposal does not meet these requirements and so the
proposal is contrary to this structure plan policy.
ESLP Implementation policies
9.60
ELSP policy IMP4 requires planning agreements between developers and local
planning authorities to be in place prior to issuing planning permission. A range of
planning obligations has been submitted by the applicant depending on the
acceptability or otherwise of the retail component of the application.
9.61
If the retail component of the application of 3,716sqm were to be approved, the
applicant would make a contribution of £3.1m to help fund a new non-denominational
secondary school at Winchburgh. If the 3,716sqm retail component is not approved,
the applicant has indicated that there would be a reappraisal of the timing, quantum
and phasing of planning obligation for non-denominational secondary school
provision at Winchburgh.
9.62
The applicant‟s position that no planning obligation for non-denominational secondary
school provision would be payable if the retail component of the development is not
approved is not acceptable given the capacity issues that exist.
West Lothian Local Plan 2009 (WLLP)
WLLP Strategy
9.63
The WLLP, like the ELSP, identifies Linlithgow as an area of restraint due to
infrastructure, landscape and environmental objectives. The Linlithgow Area Local
Plan set out various reasons why there should be development restraint in Linlithgow,
including the need to preserve Linlithgow‟s small scale character and protect its
landscape setting. Other reasons include issues with traffic congestion, the
environmental capacity of the town, the impact on community facilities and education
capacity issues. In the WLLP, Linlithgow continues to be identified as an area of
restraint. The WLLP reflects the fact that the Linlithgow Area Local Plan established
the principle that Linlithgow had reached its environmental capacity. It is for the
emerging development plan to consider whether this status should be changed.
19
WLLP Environment policies
9.64
The Burghmuir proposal requires to be assessed against a range of policies in the
WLLP that safeguard the environment of West Lothian. The socio-economic benefits
of the proposal including affordable housing and improved accessibility to the M9
would offset Policy ENV7 which states that development will not be permitted if it
results in the permanent loss of prime agricultural land. Policy ENV8 requires an
assessment of soils on all greenfield sites over 1ha. The Burghmuir Masterplan area
covers approximately 51 ha. No soil assessment has been provided by the applicant,
contrary to this policy.
9.65
Policy ENV31 relates to development in the countryside. The Burghmuir proposal is
considered to be contrary to this policy as the proposal does not meet any of the
detailed exceptions (i) – (vii). Policy ENV33 requires new development in the
countryside (acceptable in terms of Policy ENV 31) to conform to the design and
development management policy guidelines issued by the council and contained in
Planning Advice Notes. The Burghmuir proposal is considered to be contrary to this
policy as it is not acceptable in terms of Policy ENV 31.
9.66
Policy ENV 36 states that leisure and tourism developments will be supported in rural
areas where they are appropriate to a rural location, and where they conform to the
other relevant countryside and heritage policies of the plan. Other than the hotel
proposal, the planned dance studio and community sports facility conflict with this
policy.
WLLP Built and archaeological heritage policies
9.67
The proposal will not conflict with policies that seek to protect the built heritage
assets of Linlithgow and conditions could be imposed to safeguard archaeological
attributes if planning permission is to be granted.
WLLP Employment policies
9.68
Land to the north west of the application site is an allocated employment site
Springfield North (ELI8) and in this case the site is allocated for class 4 business use,
high amenity and for a single user (Oracle). The site is not included in the
boundaries of the Burghmuir planning application and is subject to an expression of
interest in terms of its broader use. That proposal will be considered in the context of
the local development plan.
WLLP Housing policies
9.69
Policy HOU1 relates to housing land supply in West Lothian. The proposal receives
no support from Policy HOU 1 as the site is not identified in the WLLP and is not
shown on the proposals map as a housing site.
9.70
WLLP policy HOU 5 requires developers to provide recreational and amenity open
space in accordance with the council‟s Residential Development Guide. Being an
application for planning permission in principle only there are no grounds to assume
that the terms of this policy cannot be met. Similarly policies on design, densities and
road layouts can be addressed at a later stage if planning permission in principle was
to be granted.
9.71
Policy HOU 10 relates to affordable housing. The most up to date position is that the
Burghmuir development will include provision for 25% affordable housing. This will be
20
in the form of serviced land transferred to the council. However, this would reduce to
15% if a contribution was made to the cost of providing a non-denominational
secondary school at Winchburgh.
WLLP Transport policies
9.72
Given the views of Transport Scotland and WLC Transportation, there are no
grounds to assume that, subject to planning conditions and a further assessment at
the detailed design stage the transportation policies in the local plan cannot be met.
9.73
Policy TRAN 29 and proposals map 2 safeguard land for westbound slips and a
park and ride facility at Junction 3 of the M9. Realistically, with constraints on public
sector finances, the only prospect of the slips being delivered in the short to medium
term is through a development led solution. It is understood that Wallace Land, the
applicant for the Burghmuir proposal, has control of the land required to deliver the
slips. The ability of the proposal to deliver the westbound slips at Junction 3 of the M9
is a material consideration and is a beneficial aspect of the proposed development.
9.74
The proposal includes provision for a new 100 space long term car park within the
neighbourhood centre.
9.75
It should be noted that the proposed development will result in the council incurring
additional school transport costs. The impact of this on the council would be reduced
if developer contributions were obtained for additional school transport costs
incurred. This has not been included in the planning obligations offered by the
applicant.
WLLP Town centre and retailing policies
9.76
Policy TC 1 states that new retail, commercial leisure and other developments
appropriate to town centres should be located in accordance with the sequential test
principles, The proposal is considered to be contrary to policy TC1 as it does not
meet any of the locational criteria (a-d) of policy TC1 of the WLLP. The application
site is not a location that is identified by the WLLP for the provision of a local centre
or as a planned urban area within which such a centre may come forward.
9.77
Policy TC12 supports retail and other town centre developments within the town
centre boundaries identified on the proposals map. Proposals outwith the centres,
other than those serving only local or neighbourhood needs, would not normally be
supported. The proposal is considered to be contrary to policy TC12 as it is not within
the Linlithgow town centre boundary and the review of the applicant‟s retail statement
by the council‟s retail consultant has indicated that the proposed supermarket is likely
to serve more than local or neighbourhood needs and have unacceptable impacts on
Linlithgow and Bo‟ness town centres.
9.78
Further discussion on the retail component of the application is set out in section 10
below.
WLLP Community, sports and education facilities and open space policies &
Implementation policies
9.79
In accordance with WLLP Policy COM 9a developer contributions will be required for
cemetery provision. In accordance with paragraphs 10.27 -10.29 of the WLLP and
policy COM 11 developers will be required to fund, or contribute to the cost of works
of public art. Subject to conditions and appropriate developer contributions, the
proposal will comply with these polices.
21
WLLP Education policies
9.80
Policy IMP 2 relates to developer contributions for denominational secondary school
provision. There is no conflict with this policy because the applicant is willing to make
contributions in accordance with the relevant SPG. Policy IMP3 relates to legal
agreements to secure infrastructure. Education Planning objects because of the
impact of the proposal on education capacity. The proposal is therefore contrary to
Policy IMP 3.
10.0
OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
The Strategic Development Plan (SESplan):
10.1
The Strategic Development Plan will replace the Edinburgh and Lothian Structure
Plan. On the 29 June 2012 the SESplan Joint Committee approved the SESplan
Proposed Plan for submission to Scottish Ministers. Examination is currently
underway and it is anticipated that the Scottish Ministers will announce a decision on
the plan no later than the end of June 2013. The proposed plan currently identifies all
of West Lothian, excluding the Pentlands, as a Strategic Development Area (SDA)
where local development plans should direct further strategic development.
10.2
Unlike the current structure plan the SDP does not identify Linlithgow as an area of
restraint. However, this should not be read as a commitment or requirement to
change the area of restraint status of Linlithgow. It is simply a recognition that areas
of restraint are a local rather than a strategic issue and are thus deferred to local
development plans. Policy 1A of the SDP Proposed Plan requires local development
plans to identify any areas of restraint which are necessary as a result of
environmental and infrastructure constraints.
10.3
In addition it should be noted that there is an outstanding SDP objection to Linlithgow
not being identified as an area of restraint in the SDP and this will be considered by
the Reporters as part of the Examination. There is also an objection to West Lothian
in its near entirety being shown as a Strategic Development Area (SDA). The
objector argues that the boundary of the SDA should be more precise taking into
account constraints on landscape and other factors.
10.4
It should be noted that West Lothian Council promoted the identification of most of
West Lothian as an SDA in order to allow the maximum flexibility in identifying sites
to meet any additional land requirement identified through the SDP. It should not be
taken that the extensive area of the SDA means that development will be supported
in every town, or indeed outwith urban areas. The actual sites supported for
development will be progressed through the local development plan taking in to
account a large number of factors including sustainability of the location and the
availability of infrastructure.
10.5
The SDP states that over 22,300 new homes have already been committed in West
Lothian. Paragraph 92 states that within West Lothian, the LDP will allocate sites that
are capable of development over the period to 2019 to accommodate an additional
500 homes. Sites for a further 1,250 new homes will be allocated within the LDP to
meet the housing land requirement over the period 2019-2024 as set out above.
Allocations will be focused in sustainable locations where infrastructure is either
available or can be provided and in locations where there are no environmental
constraints.
22
10.6
Whilst the Reporters have yet to publish their recommendations, the Reporters have
requested that SESplan provide further information and have indicated that they are
considering recommending significant modifications be made in relation to the
housing land requirements set out in the plan. In its response to this further
information request, SESplan has indicated that:
It considers that the Proposed Plan is compliant with SPP and presents a
realistic and deliverable strategy.
The SESplan member authorities are of the view that the Housing Needs and
Demand Assessment (HNDA) over-estimates need and demand in the plan
periods.
It is legitimate for planning authorities to choose a requirement, either higher or
lower than the HNDA need and demand figure, taking into account wider
strategic economic, social and environmental policy objectives.
Increasing new allocations to meet the HNDA figure will have no real effect on
reducing the shortfall in the short term and increasing new allocations risks
undermining the viability and deliverability of sites which have been identified
through statutory processes.
10.7
The Directorate of Planning & Environmental Appeals has recently confirmed that a
Hearing will not take place to hear oral evidence on any matters relating to
outstanding objections to the Proposed Plan and that a report on the Examination will
be submitted to Scottish Ministers soon.
10.8
At this stage, it cannot be assumed that significant modifications in relation to the
housing land requirements will be recommended by the Reporters, nor can any
assumptions be made about what the implications for West Lothian might be, even if
significant modifications are recommended. It should also be noted that the Reporter
could identify that there may be scope for increasing output from sites in West
Lothian which could imply that any future land supply issues are focussed elsewhere
in the SESplan area. However, these matters will not become clear until the report on
the SDP Examination is published and approved by Scottish Ministers.
West Lothian Local Development Plan (LDP)
10.9
The council is currently preparing a Main Issues Report (MIR) for the LDP. To help
with this process the council undertook a call for sites and received 225 submissions.
An expression of interest (EOI) for a mixed use development including retail, housing,
hotel, care home and greenspace plus associated infrastructure works including west
facing slips onto the M9 and circa 600 homes at Burghmuir was submitted by the
applicant. A number of other EOI submissions have been submitted for Linlithgow.
These will be assessed along with all other submissions.
10.10 Development Plan Scheme 5 (DPS5) advises that the MIR is likely to be published in
summer this year. LDP adoption is expected in 2015 at the earliest. It is likely that
new housing allocations brought forward following adoption of the LDP will probably
not start to make a contribution to housing completions until around 2017 as each
site will require a lead in time to obtain necessary consents before a site start can be
made. However, it is possible that some new sites could come forward in advance of
the LDP being adopted which will add to the effective housing land supply.
23
Scottish Planning Policy
10.11 SPP is a relevant consideration on housing land supply. At paragraph 75 it is stated
that „a supply of effective land for at least 5 years should be maintained at all times to
ensure a continuous generous supply of land for house building.......Development
plans should identify triggers for the release of future phases of effective sites, such
as where the housing land audit or development plan action programme indicates
that a five year effective land supply is not being maintained‟.
10.12 An effective 5 year housing land supply is not being maintained but the Lothian
councils have decided that additional land should not be brought forward for reasons
set out previously.
10.13 SPP at paragraph 97 states that “Prime quality agricultural land is a finite national
resource. Development on prime agricultural land should not be permitted unless it is
an essential component of the settlement strategy or is necessary to meet an
established need, for example for major infrastructure development, where no other
suitable site is available....When forming the settlement strategy, planning authorities
should consider the impact of the various options on prime quality agricultural land
and seek to minimise its loss”.
10.14 The settlement strategy set out in the WLLP includes the allocation of various sites
for housing which are classified as prime quality agricultural land. The application site
is, however, not one of them. It may be the case that further prime quality agricultural
land will require to be released in the LDP to meet the requirements of the SDP but
this cannot be confirmed at this stage as the scale of the allocations required by the
SDP are not confirmed and the assessment of various sites that could be brought
forward in the LDP has not been completed.
10.15 SPP is relevant in relation to town centre and retailing issues, paragraphs 52 – 64
refer. SPP requires planning authorities to support a diverse range of community and
commercial uses in town centres, identify a network of centres in development plans,
to bring forward actions that improve town centres and apply the sequential approach
when selecting locations for all retail and commercial leisure uses unless the
development plan identifies an exception. In accordance with the requirements of
SPP, a retail impact assessment has been submitted with the Burghmuir application.
Retailing issues are considered below.
11.0
RETAIL ASSESSMENT
11.1
A foodstore with a floorspace of 40,000 square feet (3,716 square metres) forms part
of the proposals.
11.2
In a letter dated 5th April 2013 the applicant‟s agent has advised that to accord with
council policy and in view of the recent decisions made on the expansion of the
Regent Centre the supermarket proposal should be deleted and replaced with a
condition that allows up to 500sq.m of local neighbourhood shopping. The removal of
the supermarket, a key component of the original application, is a substantial change
in the description of the development for which planning permission is sought and the
council is unable to agree to this variation. The application must therefore be
considered on the basis of the reduced size of the food store, i.e. 3716sqm.
11.3
The applicant‟s revised Retail Statement for the smaller 3,716 sq.m foodstore
submitted in support of the application concludes that the proposed foodstore would
24
not have an impact which would be significant enough to cause harm to other centres
within the defined catchment area. The indicative layout plan submitted as part of the
application shows the foodstore to be approximately a mile from Linlithgow town
centre. The defined catchment area includes most of Bo‟ness as well as Linlithgow.
11.4
Scottish Planning Policy requires that a sequential approach is used to determine the
most appropriate location of all retail proposals of this scale unless the development
plan identifies an exception. The applicants state that there is no site which could
accommodate a new development of the scale proposed within Linlithgow town
centre, and that the proposed foodstore‟s location within a proposed development
which would constitute an extension to the town would make it comply with national
planning policy in this regard.
11.5
It is, nonetheless, an out of centre location in planning terms. SPP is relevant in
relation to town centre and retailing issues, paragraphs 52 – 64 refer.
11.6
SPP states that out-of-centre locations should only be considered when: all town
centre, edge of town centre and other commercial centre options have been
assessed and discounted as unsuitable or unavailable; development of the scale
proposed is appropriate, and there will be no significant adverse effect on the vitality
and viability of existing centres. Development plans should indicate whether retail or
commercial development may be appropriate outwith existing centres and identify
appropriate locations.
11.7
The ELSP underpins national policy by identifying Linlithgow Town Centre as a
preferred location for any retail development. Policy TC 1 of the West Lothian Local
Plan strengthens this by stating: New retail, commercial leisure and other
developments appropriate to town centres should be located in accordance with
sequential principles.
11.8
There is agreement between the council and the applicant that there is spare
capacity for convenience shopping in Linlithgow, although there is a difference of
opinion on the impact on that spare capacity that under-trading represents. The
council‟s retail consultant concludes that a planning permission to extend the Regent
Centre supermarket in the town centre demonstrates that there is an alternative
location, within the town centre, for a retail development which would address the
current deficiency in retail capacity within Linlithgow.
11.9
The applicant‟s statement does not conclude that this is the case; it mentions the
proposal to extend the Regent Centre store in a section in the Retail Statement on
sequential analysis and that this town centre site accords with policy.
11.10 The council‟s assessment of the applicant‟s retail statement identifies the decision
taken by the applicant not to take account of the proposal to extend the Tesco store
in the town centre and include it in a sequential test as critical, and concludes that the
Burghmuir proposal in this respect is contrary to the development plan The council‟s
assessment of the applicant‟s Retail Statement also disagrees with the conclusions
reached by the applicant in one other significant matter: the under-trading which, it is
claimed in the council‟s report, affects existing foodstores in Linlithgow.
11.11 The assessment by the retail consultant commissioned by the council of the current
retail situation suggests that there is under-trading of 18% in the Linlithgow area and
13% in Bo‟ness. In Linlithgow the under-trading relates mostly to the Sainsbury‟s
foodstore at Linlithgow Bridge, but also affects the Tesco store at the Regent Centre.
25
If a store is under-trading any impact on it from a new store will be exacerbated.
Because the applicant does not agree that under-trading is significant, it is
considered that their assessment of the impact of the proposed foodstore at
Burghmuir on the established town centres of Linlithgow and Bo‟ness is flawed.
11.12 The council‟s assessment concludes that the applicant‟s retail statement is “not a
reasonable guide to the likely effects on the town centres because it does not include
the proposed Regent Centre extension in Linlithgow, nor does it recognise the
significant levels of under-trading (which heightens retail impact).”
11.13 Because the extension to the Regent Centre store in Linlithgow town centre is not
taken into account, the applicant‟s retail statement does not examine the scenario of
both proposals being approved and built. The council‟s assessment addresses the
likely impacts if both proposals were to be granted and constructed; the likely
cumulative impact, in terms of loss of trade, is projected at around 39% for the
Linlithgow Regent Centre, around 42% for Sainsburys, and around 30% for the
Bo‟ness Tesco, with some 25% impact on other shops in Linlithgow town centre.
11.14 The council‟s assessment also examines the scenario if the proposed extension to
the Tesco foodstore is not built, and on the basis of the impacts of the Burghmuir
supermarket on Linlithgow town centre of around 26% and on Bo‟ness town centre of
around 20%, it is concluded that, even without the Regent Centre extension, the
proposed Burghmuir supermarket could not be accommodated without threatening
the vitality and viability of the town centres of Linlithgow and Bo‟ness. Members
should note that Falkirk Council has lodged an objection even to the smaller scale
store proposed at Burghmuir.
12.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
12.1
Statue requires that in making a determination on the planning application that
decision must be in accordance with the development plan unless material
considerations dictate otherwise. Material considerations are outlined in Circular
4/2009 Development Management Procedures. The proposal is significantly contrary
to the development plan in terms of housing, education, countryside, retail, and prime
quality agricultural land policies. It brings with it advantages in the provision of new
slip roads onto the M9 and the provision of land that may, if development proceeds,
give rise to employment opportunities and allows for the development of affordable
housing.
12.2
The applicant has submitted an initial note on his considerations on material
considerations which is available from Committee Services. In coming to a view on
the development proposed at Burghmuir it is important to determine whether material
considerations offset the development plan presumption against the development. It
is the officers‟ view that any material matters identified by the developer do not justify
setting aside the development plan.
12.3
Legitimate public concern is a material consideration provided that it is expressed on
relevant planning maters. Section 8 of this report summarises the very substantial
volume of public concern that has been submitted and it is clear from that analysis
that it is submitted on relevant planning matters. In particular respondents are
concerned about education and retail capacity matters and these are both issues that
coincide with the council‟s assessment of the proposal. To the applicant little weight
ought to be attached to the volume of objectors; an analysis of this in the context of
circular 4/2009 does not support this view. Importantly the objection from the
26
developers at Winchburgh is relevant given the importance of a denominational
secondary school and the need for the council to support its development plan
strategy.
12.4
Indeed, if the Burghmuir development was to be supported and a new school was not
delivered at Winchburgh by the 550th house there, there is a scenario which would
see development at Winchburgh, which is wholly compliant with the development
plan strategy stop, while development at Burghmuir, which is wholly contrary to the
development plan strategy would progress. Such an situation would seriously
undermine the development plan strategy.
12.5
The views of consultees are also a material consideration and as set out in this report
there are no objections to the proposal from key agencies. However, again, it is not
sufficient simply to identify that a proposal does not cause any problems as the basis
for setting aside the development plan. Such an approach would seriously undermine
the „plan-led„ approach promoted in national plan policy.
12.6
The applicant points out that the council is not maintaining an effective five year
housing land supply. This is correct but the Lothian Councils decided in August 2011
not to release additional housing land because they considered that the reasons for
the lack of an effective five year supply were due to infrastructure and marketing
reasons rather than a lack of land identified for housing. In any event, the proposal is
not effective for education capacity reasons and even if there was no education
constraint, the lead in time for delivering motorway slips in advance of any
development being occupied is such that the site will not make any contribution to the
current structure plan housing requirement up to 2015.
12.7
The applicant has carried out an analysis that demonstrates that the housing shortfall
for West Lothian for the structure plan period will be a minimum of 5,062 houses. The
applicant has indicated that the Reporter for the SESplan examination has identified
the housing requirement for West Lothian to 2032. This is disputed. The Reporter has
not yet published a report setting out findings and recommendations on the SESplan
examination. The applicant is placing too much emphasis on a further information
request dated 19 December 2012 issued on behalf of the Reporter. SESplan has
responded to this further information request.
12.8
The applicant has stated that the West Lothian housing requirement for 2009 to 2019
is 11,420 houses or 1,142 per annum. This is disputed. The housing requirement will
not be settled until Scottish Ministers consider the Reporter‟s recommendations on
the SESplan examination.
12.9
The applicant states that the council‟s remedy is to release more housing land is
Policy HOU 10 of the approved structure plan. This policy requires land to be brought
forward in CDAs and/or in the west of West Lothian if there are deficiencies in
housing land supply. The applicant states that bringing forward additional land in
CDAs is not possible because existing CDA allocations will still be under construction
in the period to 2024 and beyond. It is accepted that existing CDA allocations will
take a considerable time to be built out based on existing build rates but the CDA
areas as identified in the approved structure plan cover a wide area of West Lothian
and for this reason officers do not accept that bringing forward sites within the CDAs
is impossible.
12.10 For example, the council has already decided that it is minded to grant planning
permission for a site at Brucefield Industrial Estate within the Livingston and Almond
27
Valley CDA. The applicant does not consider if it is possible to bring forward sites
within the west of West Lothian.
12.11 In addition the council‟s „Call for Sites,‟ as a prelude to preparing the local
development plan, has resulted in a significant number of potential sites coming
forward. The capacity of these sites will be way in excess of any requirement coming
forward in the strategic development plan. The current requirement is for land for an
additional 1750 houses to be identified for development in the period to 2024. The
Burghmuir site, if approved, would account for over one third of this requirement and
supporting this application, in advance of a full consideration of all sites which are
being promoted through the LDP process would not be appropriate. For this reason
the Burghmuir application is premature.
12.12 The applicant has stated that the council has agreed that the Burghmuir site is
effective. This is not correct. There is an education capacity constraint which results
in the site being constrained. The applicant has stated approval of the Burghmuir
residential element helps the council with its Housing Recovery Programme. This is
not the case, as the site is not considered to be effective at this time.
12.13 The applicant has stated that Burghmuir is part of the solution for delivering future
infrastructure in West Lothian including CDAs. However, the applicant‟s planning
obligation proposals are conditional on planning permission being granted for a
supermarket which the council‟s retail consultant has concluded will result in
unacceptable retail impacts on Linlithgow and Bo‟ness town centres. The applicant
initially stated that there would be no contributions for ND secondary school
infrastructure if the retail component of the Burghmuir proposals was not approved.
To the applicant a discussion is needed with the council on the quantum, phasing
and timing of contributions if the development were to exclude a supermarket.
12.14 The applicant has stated that the infrastructure offer it is proposing cannot be
bettered by any other development notified to the council as part of the Call for Sites
consultation on the emerging LDP. No evidence has been supplied by the applicant
to back up this statement.
12.15 The applicant has stated that there is no other site which will provide a range of local
needs for Linlithgow. Whilst it is acknowledged that there are some beneficial
aspects of the proposal (e.g. motorway slips, hotel and affordable housing) Linlithgow
is identified in the development plan as an area of restraint and any review of this
status should be considered in the context of the LDP. In any case, the beneficial
aspects of the proposals can only be delivered if other aspects of the proposals do
not result in infrastructure problems and do not result in other unacceptable
consequences such as adverse impact on the vitality and viability of town centres.
12.16 The applicant has stated that considerable weight should be given to the as yet
unapproved Strategic Development Plan. Whilst it is acknowledged that this is a
material consideration, there are unresolved objections to key elements of this plan
which are being considered at Examination. Limited weight should therefore be given
to the SESplan Proposed Plan when considering this application.
12.17 The applicant has stated that Linlithgow Academy can accommodate over 1,300 new
homes within its catchment area. However, this conclusion does not take account of
S1 intake limitations or consider the demand for pupil places beyond the 10 year
forecast period. See Education response for more details.
28
12.18 The applicant states that SESplan Policy 1A promotes sustainable development in all
towns in West Lothian including Linlithgow. This is disputed. Whilst most parts of
West Lothian are identified as part of a proposed Strategic Development Area in the
SESplan Proposed Plan, this could change as this plan is still at Examination and
there are key unresolved objections. In any event, even if this part of the Proposed
Plan does not change, Policy 1A currently states that Local Development Plans
should identify any areas of restraint which are necessary as a result of
environmental and infrastructure constraints.
12.19 The applicant has stated that the policy framework in the SESplan Proposed Plan
supports development in towns like Linlithgow which do not have existing allocated
land. This is disputed and the applicant has provided no evidence that the Proposed
Plan contains support for this approach.
12.20 The applicant has stated that the SESplan Examination has already concluded that
the methodology adopted by SESplan is not in accord with the requirements set by
Scottish Ministers. Additionally, the applicant states that the Reporter has concluded
that the scale of land release in West Lothian will be significantly higher than that set
out in the SESplan Proposed Plan. The applicant estimates that the housing shortfall
to 2019 will be around 5,000 houses. The Reporter has not yet published a report
setting out findings and recommendations on the SESplan examination. The
applicant is placing too much emphasis on the further information request issued on
behalf of the Reporter on 19 December 2012. SESplan has responded to this further
information request. Even if the housing requirement for West Lothian increases
following approval of the SDP, it cannot be assumed at this stage that allocations will
be proposed in Linlithgow. Officers are considering all options and will bring forward a
preferred spatial strategy for consideration once the Examination Report has been
considered.
12.21 The applicant has stated that the Reporter for the SESplan examination has
confirmed that the SDP needs to set out the strategic housing requirements for each
local development plan area and this information is available from the regional
HNDA. It is premature to draw conclusions from this further information request as
the Reporter‟s response to the SESplan response is not known. In any case, in the
further information request, it was stated that the Reporter is satisfied that the
information from the HNDA provided the basis for making modifications, but only for
the SESplan area as a whole. The implications of the Reporter‟s comments for West
Lothian are therefore unclear.
12.22 The applicant indicates that the Examination of the SESplan Proposed Plan is not
considering any matters relevant to Linlithgow. This is disputed. There is objection to
Linlithgow not being identified as an area of restraint and there is objection to the
Strategic Development Area covering West Lothian in its near entirety.
12.23 Finally members should be aware that on 3rd April 2013 solicitors for the applicant
contacted Development Management following the decision of the Development
Management Committee to be minded to grant retail expansion proposals at the
Regent Centre in Linlithgow. The council was advised that in light of the Regent
Centre decision the information in the Burghmuir application is “out of date”. The
applicants wished to carry out a further assessment of retail, traffic and air quality
impacts and that this work “is likely to give rise to changes” to the Burghmuir
proposals. The applicants sought a deferral of the consideration of their application to
allow this further assessment work to be undertaken. Members should note that in
view of the reduction in scale of the retail component council officials consider that
further air quality, retail and transportation studies are not necessary.
29
12.24 On 5 April, planning consultants for the applicant, in referring to the earlier solicitor‟s
letter, suggested to the council that the size of the retail component ought to be
reduced to 500sqm and become a „local neighbourhood function‟ rather than a
medium sized foodstore. The council is unable to consider this substantial change in
the description of planning application, and the decision on the application must be
based on the 3,716sqm supermarket that the applicant agrees is contrary to council
policy.
12.25 From an analysis of the material considerations that are relevant to this determination
it is concluded that none outweigh the conflict with the development plan.
13.0
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
13.1
The application for planning permission in principle for the proposed mixed use
development at Burghmuir is a major planning application that is significantly contrary
to the development plan. The proposal conflicts with the council‟s policies on
housing land, education, retailing, and prime quality agricultural land. Nevertheless
there are benefits that will flow from the proposal if it was to proceed and which
comprise of the enhanced motorway junction and the provision of land for a hotel and
affordable housing. These positive components do not offset the development plan
presumption against the development however.
13.2
There is no doubt that a scheme such as Burghmuir could be designed in
accordance with best practice and a high quality residential environment could be
achieved at the detailed planning stage. The applicant has gone to great lengths to
demonstrate his commitment to well planned and sustainable economic growth and
the mix of built development, open space and landscaping will provide an attractive
residential environment.
13.3
The provision of west bound slips onto the M9 is a further tangible benefit that will
extend to all residents of the town and enable an important transport facility to be
implemented at no cost to the public purse.
13.4
There are no objections from the key agencies consulted on the application and
internal consultations within the council from transportation, environmental health and
housing do not oppose the development. The proposal will assist in the provision for
affordable housing in Linlithgow, an area identified by the council as needing
additional homes of this type.
13.5
The council‟s key housing land strategy contained in the structure plan and the West
Lothian Local Plan comprises the provision of the core development areas in
Winchburgh, Armadale and East Calder/West Livingston. The development at the
Heartlands site is another area allocated for residential growth, and there are further
development plan compliant permissions, which could be issued soon, at Brucefield
and Pumpherston. The current economic difficulties have placed a major burden on
the commencement of development of these sites which are now slowly being built.
13.6
There‟s a responsibility on the council, as set out in a letter from the Scottish
Government‟s Chief Planner to maintain a supply of land, in the right places and
which is free from constraints and can be developed. The slowdown in housing
completions across Scotland has meant that there remains a large quantity of
housing sites with planning permission in West Lothian and it is not the lack of
availability of allocated land but the current economic climate that is playing a
30
significant part in the slowdown in the delivery of new homes. In any event the site at
Burghmuir cannot be regarded as being able to fulfil the development plan
requirements due to the long lead in times to open the west bound M9 slips, an
infrastructure requirement that must be in place before the first house is occupied.
13.7
A key consideration in assessing the Burghmuir application is that of education
capacity. Whilst there may be a prospect that primary school capacity is capable of
being addressed and the denominational secondary sector can similarly be
addressed, there is no capacity in Linlithgow Academy to accommodate the
development proposed at Burghmuir. Any further education capacity that does exist
must be reserved for a scheme that is development plan compliant and indeed the
planning obligation between the council and the developer‟s at Winchburgh allows for
the possibility of the current cap on house building there to be increased. Capacity
constraints at Linlithgow Academy have been assessed by the applicant who has
prepared a paper about managing the education risk. Even if the housing permission
at Westfield did lapse that site remains allocated in the development plan and the
council cannot disregard that by allowing its educational impact to be met by a
proposal that conflicts with the development plan.
13.8
The site comprises countryside outwith the settlement envelope of Linlithgow. Whilst
the site is not accorded any formal landscape designation, at the present time
Linlithgow is identified as an area of restraint in the development plan. The
environmental quality of the setting of the town is a key factor and the proposal
before the council would bring about an irreversible change in the principle eastern
approach to the town, replacing views over open countryside.
13.9
The application contains provision for retail development in an out of town location.
The council has recently decided that it is minded to approve the expansion of retail
provision in a town centre site at the Regent Centre and there is no further capacity in
Linlithgow for this scale of retail development. The applicant accepts that the retail
provision at the site is contrary to council policy and has sought to remove that from
the application which must otherwise be determined on the basis of what was
submitted by the applicant.
13.10 It is a matter of fact that the development plan process is under review and both the
strategic development plan and the local development plan will require to examine,
through a plan led system, the future direction of growth, if any, in Linlithgow. Whilst
some weight can be attached to the status of the emerging strategic development
plan, it is a matter for the local development plan to identify the appropriate sites. A
grant of planning permission in principle for development at Burghmuir would be
premature at this point in the development plan process, especially given the
infrastructure difficulties associated with the proposal.
Chris Norman
Development Management Manager
17th April 2013
31
Attachments
Location plan
Annex 1 Masterplan
Annex 2 Summary of the Environmental Impact Assessment
Planning application file 0095/P/12 (the file contains the applicant‟s later submissions on
material planning considerations, education and developer contributions)
32
0095/P/12
Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right 2012. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey
Licence number 100037194.
1:5000
Development Principles
05
Illustrative Masterplan
Burghmuir, Linlithgow
Masterplan Report
24
January 2012
ANNEX 2
A summary of the environmental impact assessment submitted with the planning application.
Transportation and access
The applicant‟s transport case, as amplified in the accompanying transport
assessment, is predicated on the construction of the new west facing slip roads onto
the M9. It is proposed that such works would take place prior to the occupation of any
house and before the opening of the supermarket. The development, when complete,
is expected to generate some additional 8918 trips per day. The new motorway slips
would mean that there would be a reduction in traffic in Linlithgow High Street by
around 10% at peak times with the development in place.
Preliminary designs have been prepared for the revisions to J3 and Falkirk Council has
approved planning permission in principle for that part of the works in their
administrative area.
The EIS stresses that the internal road network would be designed in accordance with
current council and government policy and will accord with guidance in „Designing
Streets‟.
To the applicant during the construction and operational phases of the development
the transport and access impacts of the Burghmuir proposals would have only
negligible environmental effects when based upon the Institute of Environmental
Management and Assessment‟s criteria. Additional effects relating to air quality and
noise attributable to transport and access are addressed elsewhere in the EIS.
The water environment
Surface water from that part of the site north of Blackness Road would be routed
towards Linlithgow Loch; that flowing from the south would be via the Errick Burn. A
flood risk assessment has been carried out and drainage from the site will be designed
to attenuate a 1:200 year event. Sustainable Urban Drainage systems (SUDS) will be
designed in accordance with current best practice. A combination of swales and
retention ponds will be incorporated in the design of the system to protect any adverse
effect on Linlithgow Loch. Further details that will be required at the detailed stage of
the development, if planning permission is to be granted, would include the measures
to ensure that there is no deterioration in water quality at Linlithgow Loch.
In order to ensure that there is no downstream flood risk surface water will be
attenuated to the current greenfield release.
There are no grounds to refuse the planning application on the basis of its effect on the
water environment.
Geology and Ground Conditions
The EIS concludes that there are no adverse effects on the development caused by
underlying geological conditions or its historical usage as there is no relevant mining
history below the site. The EIS is largely silent on the underlying soils contained within
the site and the prime quality agricultural land that it supports.
33
Noise
The EIS contains the noise impact assessment for the development. Noise from the
development will principally be attributable to traffic and construction works. There
would be a 9% increase in vehicle movements west of Junction 3 on the M9 and an
increase of 43% of baseline traffic flows on the A803 Blackness Road. The EIS
examines noise from the development on existing sensitive receptors and the impact
of noise from peripheral sources, and most notably the M9, on new receptors within
the site if the development were to proceed
The EIS concludes that the new slip roads on the M9 are unlikely to cause a change of
background noise on existing receptors. A range of sensitive receptors is identified in
the EIS which in turn concludes that the remainder of the development would have
only a „negligible‟ effect on noise received at these identified places, based upon the
„significance criteria‟ contained in a standard national statement the Department of
Transport‟s „Design Manual for Roads and Bridges‟. To protect the amenity of
residents of the development, mitigation would be designed into the housing layout
and new houses would be complaint with World Health Organisation noise criteria.
Air Quality
The air quality impact of the development is essentially the effects of additional traffic
that would arise if the development were to proceed, both during its construction and
after its full completion and occupation. The development will increase traffic on the
adjacent Blackness Road by some 43% at peak times but it is predicted that there will
be a „slight‟ reduction in traffic on Linlithgow High Street due to the four way slips and
the removal for west bound traffic which would otherwise pass through the town
towards Junction 4. Any change in traffic has a potential to adversely affect air quality
and public health and amenity of residents living near the roads that will receive the
additional traffic.
The environmental statement has been augmented by a further air quality assessment
which has been duly advertised as additional environmental information. The
Burghmuir development is predicted to reduce the NO2 and PM10 concentrations along
the High Street but increase concentrations of NO2 (4%) and PM10 (1-2%) at sections
of Blackness Road. Although the information was not available at the time of the air
quality modelling, the recent „minded to grant‟ decision by the council of the additional
car parking associated with the Regent Centre expansion will result in increased traffic
movement on Blackness Road.
Although the potential increased traffic movements associated with the additional car
parking was not seen by the applicant as significant, it may have significance when
considering the cumulative impact of vehicles movements on Blackness Road
associated with Burghmuir and the Regent Centre developments together.
34
Landscape and Visual Assessment
The EIS confirms that the development of the Burghmuir site will have significant
effects on the landscape of the site from various locations outwith the site including
Blackness Road, the principal eastern approach to the town. Other significant views
will arise from locations outwith the site boundary. Landscape mitigation will be part of
the development proposal. Views from the wider landscape and effects on the
landscape character of the wider area are not predicted to be significant however.
The landscape impact of the proposal by the applicant is based upon nationally
recognised guidelines and the 1998 Lothian‟s Landscape Character Assessment and
related documents. Through an accepted methodology the applicant has identified the
sensitivity of the development in terms of its landscape and visual effects, has set out
his view on the magnitude of change and then described the significance of these
effects.
To the applicant the landscape quality of the site, which is not subject to any
landscape designations, is described as being of „medium‟ sensitivity. The applicant
has identified 6 sensitive view points or receptors from which to carry out the
assessment contained in the EIS. To the applicant there are no significant effects on
the areas of great landscape value (AGLV) adjacent to the site; on the conservation
areas, on the setting of the two listed buildings nor on scheduled ancient monuments
in the town. In terms of the effects on the landscape character of the area there would
be significant changes on its immediate surroundings, from views taken from the A803
Blackness Road and the minor road a Kingsfield.
The EIS and the design statement sets out the applicant‟s mitigation measures to limit
the landscape and visual impact of the development This includes tree planting and
broad grass verges. To the applicant the development would “help create a sense of
arrival at Linlithgow”. There would be some reduction of glimpsed views to the historic
core of the town but the applicant suggests that some glimpsed views would remain.
The applicant concludes by advising that the landscape of the site and the surrounding
area is capable of absorbing the proposed development
The significance of the landscape change brought about by the development is set out
later in this report.
Ecology
The applicant has carried out an ecological study of the site and has concluded that
the intensive farmland currently comprising the site has only low ecological value.
There are no plant species of note and existing hedgerows are the most important
wildlife resource on the site. Specifically reference is made to European Protected
Species and none were present on the site, although bats are identified in the
Burghmuir farm steadings which are, in any event, not affected by the proposals.
35
The hedgerows on the site are seen to be of greatest significance to ecology; there
would be no effects on designated ecological sites neither in the vicinity of the
development nor particular habitats around the site. The developer would implement a
landscape and habitat management plan if planning permission was granted, thus
maximising the ecological benefits that would flow from the landscaping and planting
that would take place on the site.
Cultural Heritage
The EIS concludes that there is the potential for the development to impact on sub
surface archaeological assets but a programme of archaeological works in advance of
development would record these, if found.
Health Impact Assessment
As required by the council‟s supplementary planning guidance the applicant has
submitted health impact assessment (HIA). The HIA concludes that the proposal, if
implemented, would be a positive benefit on the physical and mental health of new and
existing residents. Specifically these benefits would flow from the increased access to
local services, the job opportunities that would be offered, the greenspace network,
improvements in air quality, community interaction in the neighbourhood centre and
the use of sustainable transport.
Sustainability Statement
The applicant‟s sustainability statement (SS) sets out the steps that will be taken to
achieve sustainable design solutions in the development that will be built on the site.
As reflected in the Masterplan, the SS confirms that, through design, energy
consumption and accessibility, a sustainable solution will be achieved if the
development were to proceed.
36