PLANNING APPLICATION: 15/02252/APP

In the event that a recommendation on this planning application is overturned the Committee is reminded of the advice contained on the front page of the agenda for Reports on Applications

THE PROPOSAL

Proposed demolition of the (vacant) Tennant Arms Hotel and its replacement by a new shop unit with associated parking.

The replacement building would be approx. 25m long along its frontage (south elevation facing onto St Andrews Road), 12.5m deep and 7.5m high to the roof ridge. The unit would be located on the eastern half of the site along with a small yard area (for bin storage and air conditioning and refrigeration plant), to be located between the eastern end of the building and an adjoining graveyard/raised grassed area, and enclosed by 2.5m high palisade security fencing. The western half of the site would comprise a car park and pedestrian area. The rear of the building is located approx. 1m off an existing retaining wall located along the northern boundary of the site.

Internally, the building would be single storey only with a 189sq m sales area and a 86sq m store room, the latter at the eastern end of the unit.

Proposed external finishes include a black/blue slate pitched roof, white roughcast walls with stone cladding from existing building re-used on the front (south) and side (west) elevations, and grey aluminium framed double glazed windows and doors. The architectural recessed areas to be formed along the southern elevation will be finished with a smooth cement render tinted to match the stonework.

The replacement building is designed to reflect the style and scale of the original building on the site (minus the more recent substantial single and two storey flat roofed extensions added onto both ends and to the rear of the original building).

The access to the building would be from within the car park area with a five-bay fully glazed entrance with sliding doorway and fascia signboard over.

Located alongside and immediately to the north of the shop entrance is an ATM (cash point machine). Both access to the building and the ATM are located on the western elevation and accessed from the car park area.

17 on-site car park spaces (including two disabled parking spaces) are proposed together with 3 cycle stands (for 6 bikes). The existing parking area would be extended slightly at the back by the re-positioning of a rear retaining wall in the north-western corner of the site.

The frontage of the building would be set back into the site by approx. 2.5m from the line of the existing pavement along St Andrews Road and a new service lay-by, approx. 21m long and 3m deep would be formed between the pavement and the carriageway.

THE SITE

Existing, vacant, Tennant Arms Hotel, located on the northern side of St Andrews Road Lhanbryde with existing car park area located on the western side of the existing building.

The existing building fronts the edge of the pavement onto St Andrews Road.

There are high stone/blockwork retaining walls located along the rear (north) boundary with a high, steep embankment, a graveyard and housing beyond.

Beyond the site to the east, along the road frontage, there is a raised landscape area with mature trees and a graveyard to the rear. To the west, along the road frontage, there is a house.

On the opposite side of the road there are existing shops and residential properties. HISTORY 15/01918/APP - Demolish existing hotel and erect shop unit with associated car parking facilities at Tennant Arms 15 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray - withdrawn 14 December 2015. 15/00645/APP - Change of use of former hotel to new shop with four flats at Tennant Arms 15 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray - withdrawn 8 June 2015. POLICY - SEE APPENDIX ADVERTISEMENTS None CONSULTATIONS Planning & Development – No objections. Although of some historic and townscape value, the building is not listed nor is it in a conservation area. The replacement building does reflect the existing building in terms of architectural details and massing and is of the same height and general character. In terms of PP3 and IMP1, the proposal would not have a negative impact on the street scene. With regards to the retail aspect of the proposal, the principal of a small convenience store in Lhanbryde that would serve the local population and support any future expansion of the settlement is supported and is in line with Policy R3. Environmental Health Manager – Following receipt of noise impact assessment, no objection subject to a condition specifying the rating level of noise for the associated air conditioning and refrigeration plant associated with the proposal and an assessment to be undertaken to demonstrate that the specified noise level is met. Contaminated Land - No objection. Transportation Manager – Following discussion with the agent and submission of revised plans (with revised parking and cycle arrangements and no bollards shown within

the re-aligned public footway), no objections subject to conditions and informatives as recommended, the former to include further details of the service lay-by and access, a construction traffic management plan, a deliveries management plan, and specifications for the access and parking arrangements. The servicing lay-by would be subject to a Road Traffic Order which would restrict its use to service vehicles only. Moray Flood Risk Management - No objection subject to a construction phase surface water management plan being submitted/approved prior to start of construction. Developer Obligations Unit - No contribution requirement based on nature of the development. Aberdeenshire Council Archaeology Service - No objection subject to a condition requiring the submission of a level 1 standing building condition survey. SEPA - No objection on flood risk grounds. Since flooding in 1997 the Lhanbryde Flood Alleviation Scheme has been built and is operational. The proposal would result in a decrease in land use vulnerability (to a less vulnerable use) and in areas protected by flood protection measures. the applicant should be aware of residual risks of flooding, for example from events exceeding the design standard of the scheme, climate change and/or more unlikely risks of scheme failure in the event of inadequate inspection, maintenance and operation of the scheme. Scottish Water - No response at time of report. OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS NOTE: Following the determination of this application, name and address details will be/have been removed (i.e. redacted) in accordance with the Data Protection Act (paragraph 3 of Minute, Planning & Regulatory Services Committee 16 September 2014). a) 111 representations IN OBJECTION were received from:

Mr Richard Hird, 17 Kirkhill Drive Elgin IV30 8QA

Mr Ian McGregor,Conifers Earlseat Wood Moyness IV12 5LB

Mrs Caroline Gray, Rosebank Cottage The Wyndies Garmouth IV32 7GT

Mr Andrew Gray, Oxhill Clochan AB56 5ET

Mr Duncan Paterson, 7 Innes Court Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PL

Mr Jamie Hird, 17 Kirkland Hill Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QA

Mrs Sarah Anderson, 19 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde IV30 8JU

Miss Fiona Fraser, 4 Seaforth House Garmouth Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QL

Mrs Fiona Smith, 24 North Deeside Road Mannofield Aberdeen AB157PL

Mr Stephen Scott, 25A Strathspey Dr Grantown on Spey PH26 3EY

Mr Barry Hird, 3 Tarbert Place Inverness IV3 8GB

Mr Leon Sim, The Old school house Lhanbryde IV30 8PB

Mr Findlay Morrison, 8 Woodview Crescent Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8JL

Mrs Karen Lawson, 57 Robertson Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PG

Mr Ivor Lawson, 57 Robertson Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PG

Mrs Diane Grant, 4 Emslie court, Lhanbryde, Elgin IV30 8QB

Mr Andrew Jackson, 19 Innes Court Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PL

Miss Jane Findlay, 2 Muirfield Road Elgin IV30 6DE

Mrs Shirley Stockwell, 4 Station Road Urquhart Elgin Moray IV30 8LQ

Ms Lorna Campbell, 3 Emslie Court Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QB

Mr Craig Webster, 15 Hazel Court Elgin Moray IV30 4BD

Miss Faye Mallen, 56 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8JU

Mr David Henderson, 6 Birnie Place Mosstodloch Fochabers Moray IV32 7JW

Mr Michael Stewart, Thamarit 1 Garmouth Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PD

Mr Bryan Green, 7 North Covesea Terrace Lossiemouth Moray IV31 6LZ

Mrs Anne Fyall, The Cedars Main Street Urquhart IV30 8LG

Mrs Wendy Hunter, 43 Templand Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PP

Mrs Heather Greig, 7 March Court Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8HN

Mr Steven Macdonald, 10 Gladstone Place Aberdeen AB10 6XA

Mr Gordon Browse, Top Flat 8 St. Leo Place PLYMOUTH PL2 1SG

Mr Bruce Randall, 1 Fleming Drive Kirkcaldy KY2 6SL

Miss Diane Duncan, 33 Nightingale Rd Southsea Portsmouth PO53JJ

Mrs Catherine Macintyre, 25 Sandy Road New Elgin IV30 6EQ

Mr Ian Simpson, 8 Neils View Lhanbryde IV30 8RU

Mr Kevin Boyd, 3 Cameron Drive Keith Moray AB55 5BF

Mr Robert Taylor, 32 Robertson Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PD

Mr Peter Hunter, 64 Pinewood Road Mosstodloch Fochabers Moray IV32 7JU

Miss Rachel McPhee, 24 Millbuie Street Elgin Moray IV30 6GE

Mrs Jill McPherson, 11 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde IV30 8JU

Ms Joyce McNeil, 51 Inchbroom Avenue Lossiemouth Moray IV31 6HL

Mrs Lorna Stewart, Thamarit 1 Garmouth Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PD

Mr Gregor Morrison, Maidenhillock Cottage Burnside Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PA

Mrs Yvonne Pearson, Glenesk Bogton Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8LN

Mr George Herraghty, Lothlorien Elgin Moray IV30 8LD

Mrs Lisa Illston, 31 Templand Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PP

Mrs Aileen Hay, 25 Glenlossie Drive Elgin Moray IV30 6YH

Ms Carol Clark, 2 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8NZ

Mrs Chris Fettes, Bowbank South Road Garmouth Fochabers IV32 7LX

Mrs Lynsey Wilson, Rail End House Station Road Urquhart IV30 8LQ

Ms Miriam Haywood, 3 Clashlands Drive Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8JT

Mr Christopher Lake, 12 Blackshaw Court Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8HH

Mr Stuart McIntosh, 72 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8JU

Mr Alistair Matthew, 12 Robertson Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PE

Ms Winifred Linn, Rose Cottage Lein Road Kingston Fochabers IV32 7NW

Mrs Margaret Nealer, 1 Clashlands Drive Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8JT

Mrs Christine Tarttelin, 20 Kirkhill Drive Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QA

Mr David Morrison, Maidenhillock Cottage Burnside Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PA

Mrs Jacqueline Forsyth, 51 Beils Brae Urquhart Moray IV30 8XQ

Mrs Ann Milne, 21 St Andrews Road Lhanbryde IV30 8NZ

Mr David Bayliss, 10 Woodview Crescent Lhanbryde IV30 8JL

Mrs Anne Sim, 71 Pluscarden Road Elgin Moray IV30 1SQ

Mr Allan Jones, 21 Deanshaugh Road Elgin Moray IV30 4HU

Mrs Avril Donaldson-Webster, 7 Forestry Cottages Elgin Moray IV30 8XP

Mr Stuart Reid, 1 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde Moray IV30 8JU

Mr Darren Stead, 47 Templand Road Lhanbryde IV30 8PP

Jolene Young, 7 North Covesea Terrace Lossiemouth Moray IV31 6LZ

Mr Calum Morris, 30 Woodview Crescent Lhanbryde IV30 8JL

Mrs Anne Mutch, Blaircorrie Moss Of Meft Elgin Moray IV30 8NH

Mr Aubrey Moore, 5 Kirkhill Drive Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8QA

Mr Andrew Thompson, 63 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8JU

Miss Gayle Harrold, 3 Kirkhill Drive Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QA

Miss Kimberley Ryan, 8 Woodview Crescent Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8JL

Miss Samantha Johnston, 52 Glenesk Road Lhanbryde IV30 8PW

Ms Simone Vansittart, 3 Northfield Place Lhanbryde IV30 8JX

Mr Daniel Cameron, Kinrara 61 South Street Fochabers Moray IV32 7EF

Mr Calum Pearson, Bowersburn Croftnacreich Inverness IV1 3ZE

Mr Roddy Robertson, 23 Berriedale Crescent Blantyre G72 0GA

Mr Robert Russell, 1 Burnside Place Elgin Moray IV30 6HD

Mrs Flora Young, 5 Station Row Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PZ

Mr Michael Whitson, 36 Woodlands Drive Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8JU

Mr Ian Ogg, 1 Station Row Lhanbryde ELGIN IV30 8PZ

Mrs Melanie Little, 4 Kirkland Hill Lhanbryde IV30 8QH

Mrs Jennifer Milligan, Rose Cottage 42 Balmoral Terrace Elgin Moray IV30 4JH

Mr H D McIntosh, Inisfail 7 Kirkhill Drive Lhanbryde IV30 8QA

Mr Geoff Chamberlain, Wakatanie St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8NZ

Mr David Foy, 29 Kirkland Hill Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8QH

Mrs Pauline Grant, Altnigar 6 The Dominies Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QZ

Mrs Isobel Livesey, 4 Station Row Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PZ

Lhanbryde Community Challenge, Per Mrs Anita Milne (Chairperson) Lhanbryde Community Centre Robertson Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QQ

Mrs Elizabeth Ogg, Sherbrooke 1 Station Row Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PZ

Mrs Margaret Morrison, Maidenhillock Cottage Elgin Moray IV30 8PA

Ms June Taylor, 1 Walker's Crescent Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PB

Mr William Windwick, 24 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8NZ

Mrs Muriel Smith, 30 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8NZ

Miss Kayleigh Griffiths, 12 Blackshaw Court Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8HH

Mrs Helen Hird, 17 Kirkhill Drive Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8QA

Ms Elsie Laing, 2 Station Row Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PZ

Mrs Jennifer Finnie, 83 Robertson Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8JQ

Miss Fiona Gill, The Paddock Elgin Moray IV30 8LA

Mrs Helen McKay, South Monkshill Fyvie Turriff AB53 8RQ

Mrs Eleanor Masson, 29 The Sidings Garmouth Fochabers Moray IV32 7LR

Mr And Mrs M. Allan, Camelia Cottage 5 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8NZ

Mrs Morag Mackenzie, 6 Kirkhill Drive Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8QA

Miss Emma Moore, 68 St Michaels Road Newtonhill AB39 3RW

Mrs Jenna Ward, 11 March Court Lhanbryde IV30 8HN

Mr Paul Ralph, Elm Cottage Main Street Urquhart Elgin IV30 8LG

Dr Angus McKay, South Monkshill Fyvie Turriff AB5E 8RQ

Miss Karla McCulloch, 3 St Moluag Place Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8QD

Mr Stephen Dey, 3 St Moluag Place Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8QD

Mrs Heather Brin, Burnbank 36 St Andrew's Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8NZ

Mr Darren Fitzpatrick, 40 Harding Close Llantwit Major CF61 1GX

Ms Sheila C. Silvestri, North Darkland Elgin Moray IV30 8LB

Mrs Debra Goodbrand, 82 Garmouth Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PD

Mr James Chisholm, Eilean Donan 9 Neils View Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8RU

Mr Ross McDonald, 17 Newton Place Mosstodloch IV32 7JG

J Cameron, 12 Burnside Road Lhanbryde Moray IV30 8LY

Bill Stuart, Caledonia 12 Manitoba Place Linkwood Elgin IV30 6TB

B M Bain, 4 Blackshaw Court Lhanbryde Moray IV30 8HH

B A Bain, 4 Blackshaw Court Lhanbryde Moray IV30 8HH

Jean Morton, 27 The Sidings Garmouth Fochabers Moray IV32 7LR

Mrs Kirstine Rose, Culblair Farmhouse Dalcross Inverness IV2 7JJ

Mrs Gail Mands, Rosemount Walkers Crescent Elgin IV30 8PB

Mrs Alice Stewart, Tweed Lodge Station Road Lhanbryde Elgin IV30 8PY

J. Sinclair, 24 Templand Road Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PP The main points of the representations are: Issue: Procedures not followed correctly, insufficient information. Comment (PO): Although specific details relating to this matter may not be provided, it is considered that the correct procedures have been followed and sufficient information is included with the application to enable a proper and formal assessment of the proposal. Issue: Affecting natural environment. Comment (PO): The site is for the re-development of an existing site. The adjoining open areas to the north and east of the site would not be affected nor encroached upon. The site is not subject to any nature conservation designation and the siting and design of the new shop unit, located within the built-up area of Lhanbryde, is not considered to detract from the appearance and amenity of the surrounding environment. Issue: Contrary to local plan. Comment (PO): Whilst the specific basis upon which the proposal is considered to depart from the development plan may not be indicated, it can be noted from the Observations Section of this report (below) that the proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the development plan and in all respects, it is considered to be acceptable and accord with planning policy. Issue: Over-development of the site. Comment (PO): The footprint of the shop unit as proposed is less than that covered by the existing hotel (both original and extended sections of the building). The design, including the style and scale of the building, is in keeping with that of the existing building on the site and the surrounding area. Taking all matters into account, the resultant impact of the proposal is not considered to result in an unacceptable over-development of the site. Issue: Lack of landscaping. Comment (PO): The proposal may lack landscaping provision but equally, the current use also lacks landscaping given the size and shape of the plot available and the size of buildings and provision on parking, etc on the site. Issue: Precedent. Comment (PO): This is not a material consideration since each proposal is considered on its individual merits.

Issue: Smell. Comment (PO): The proposals should not give rise to any material issue in this respect. Following consultation, the Environmental Health Manager has not objected to the proposal in terms of any potential or actual adverse odours arising from the development. Issue: Activity at unsocial hours. Comment (PO): The proposal is for the replacement of an existing hotel, and taking into account the likely times and type of activity associated with that use and its relationship to adjoining uses (both residential and retail uses where operating hours may not be restricted), it is not considered that this current proposal would give rise to any material problems. The Environmental Health Manager has not objected to the proposal in terms of adverse amenity impacts, including disturbance and disruption effects upon neighbouring property, nor recommends controlling the hours of operation of the shop unit. However, limits on noise emissions from the air conditioning and refrigeration plant are recommended to ensure such effects do not adversely impinge on the amenity of neighbouring noise-sensitive property, for example during night-time hours. Issue: Loss of privacy and overlooking. Comment (PO): Given the distances and relationship of both the existing and proposed buildings with their adjoining car park to neighbouring residential uses, in particular the house adjoining to the west, no adverse amenity issues are considered to arise including privacy and overlooking. Issue: Noise (reference to processing plant). Comment (PO): Air conditioning and refrigeration units are proposed within an enclosed yard area at the eastern end of the building. Following consideration of noise information provided by the applicant, the Environmental Health Manager has specified (by condition) the level of noise emissions from this plant which require to be observed to ensure that there is unacceptable adverse noise impact upon any nearby noise-sensitive premises. Issue: Loss of view. Comment (PO): This is not a material planning consideration. Issue: Disruption during demolition, including dust. Comment (PO): As with any new build or re-development on a site, construction impacts including disturbance and disruption are somewhat inevitable but likely to be intermittent, occur over a short-term and are temporary in duration. Attention to on-site management of construction activity, including ‘best practice’ and adherence to the requirements of other legislation can also address and mitigate the impact of such effects to ensure that any residual impacts, if any, are not significant. A traffic management plan is also required to address and manage the effects of construction activity upon the local road network. Issue: Drainage. Comment (PO): The proposal will connect to the public mains water supply and foul drainage systems, subject to agreement with Scottish Water regarding available capacity with the networks and connection arrangements. Provision is made for the on-site disposal of surface water run-off from the roof of the building and car park using soakaways, the detailed arrangements for which would be considered separately under Building Standards legislation. In principle, the arrangements for disposal of foul and surface water arrangements would accord with current requirements of planning policy.

Issue: Litter. Comment (PO): This matter would be considered under separate legislation. Issue: Problems from ATM machine (vehicle movements, use at unsocial hours). Comment (PO): The ATM machine would be an ancillary function to the use of the shop, with parking available for those wishing to use this facility. It is not considered that any out of hours use of the ATM would have a significant adverse or material impact upon the urban location involved. Issue: Loss of an iconic landmark building which has an important contribution to the setting of Lhanbryde. The existing building has historic and architectural merit and should not be demolished. The building should be 'listed.' Comment (PO): The existing building on the site is not a listed building of special architectural or historic interest (hence it is not included on the statutory list of buildings) and the site is not within a conservation area. It is understood that the original 19th Century part of the existing building was designed by a local architectural firm. Although that original (core) part of the building may have some local historic and architectural merit (for example in terms of age and local architect connections), the quality of the building has been substantially diminished by later additions including large single and two storey flat roofed extensions onto three sides of the building. Issue: The replacement building lacks merit. The impact of the height of the building and the lack of windows (represented by recessed features) would be visually detrimental. The proposals do not comply with policies PP3 and ED1 in terms of the frontage impact and the impact on the setting, and the development does not promote character, identity and a sense of arrival. The materials/finishes are inappropriate. Comment (PO): Policy ED1 does not apply as it refers to formation of new employment land which is not the case here. This proposal is to redevelop a site by replacing an existing building with a new building. In design terms it has taken architectural elements from the existing building and the material finishes including slate, stone and render are appropriate and again reflect the existing building. The style, scale and material finishes reflect and are in keeping with the existing building, and are an improvement over earlier proposals to redevelop this site, to the extent that this proposal is considered acceptable in planning policy terms including Policy PP3. Issue: Plans are inadequate as the dormer windows not shown on the plan view, there are no details of the upper floor, and there are two 'western' elevations. Comment (PO): The plans are sufficiently clear to give a proper representation of the proposals. Although not featuring on the roof plan, the dormer windows are clearly shown on the main elevational plans and their omission is not a basis to reject the proposal (and could be addressed by a revised plan). Although there is an annotational error in relation to the eastern elevation not being shown as such, it is clear from the plans which elevations relate to the building as proposed: one (west) elevation is clarified as “facing car park” and the other is “facing cemetery”. Although externally the dormers and recessed window details suggest a building with an upper floor, the internal layout plan confirms that the shop unit is laid out on a single (ground) floor only, which explains why there are no details of the upper floor. Issue: No need for a further shop. Economic impact on existing retail businesses and their possible closure. Contrary to local plan. Comment (PO): The issue of need is not a relevant planning consideration, and current (retail) planning policy does not require this to be taken into account. When Policy R3 is

applied, this proposal as an example of a neighbourhood or local shop intended to serve a local community, and the proposal is considered to comply with this policy (see Observations). Matters about economic impact relate to issues about competition between local businesses and services, which is not a material planning consideration. Issue: Traffic and parking impact including problems in terms of road safety and congestion already caused by considerable car, bus, van and commercial vehicle movements. Two bus stops are located outside the site which already cause very frequent bus movements, congestion and obstruct vehicular visibility, and these impacts would be increased by the proposal. Cars would cross the footway, the car parking spaces are too small and children at risk from narrowed pavement. Comment (PO): The Transportation Manager has considered these issues as part of the application but does not object to the proposal on road safety, traffic congestion or parking grounds. Although there is some congestion in the area, with on-street parking associated with the existing retail and residential units, the provision and availability of on-site parking for this development, in accordance with current parking standards, is not anticipated to materially add to the situation currently prevailing. The proposed service lay-by will assist unloading/loading activities associated with both the proposed and existing retail uses opposite the site. The existing access into the site is being relocated to reduce any conflict with the eastbound bus stop but as with the existing access into the site from St Andrews Road, the new access will cross the footway: an arrangement that is not uncommon and here, and elsewhere, the Transportation Manager has not objected to that ‘cross over’ arrangement as having an adverse impact on road and/or pedestrian safety. Issue: Problems from bollards on pavement. Comment (PO): Following discussion with the Transportation Manager and from the amended details, the bollards have been removed from the proposals. b) 3 representations IN SUPPORT were received from:

Mr John Third, 15 Kirkland Hill Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8QH

Mrs Shawnee Love, 4 Templand Place Lhanbryde Elgin Moray IV30 8PS

Mrs Barbara Allan, 13 Station Road Urquhart Elgin Moray IV30 8LQ The main points of the representations are:

Improved choice

Helpful competition

Beneficial re-development

Proper supermarket will benefit village Comment (PO): These representations offer support for the proposal and identify a number of potential benefits arising from the provision of this additional retail unit within Lhanbryde.

OBSERVATIONS Section 25 of the 1997 Act as amended requires applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan i.e. the adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2015 unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the main planning issues are considered below. For the avoidance of doubt, matters regarding the need for an additional shop within Lhanbryde, the identification of a proposed shop owner (where the fascia signboard on the drawings refer to “The co-operative food”), and issues relating to competition between the proposal and existing local businesses and services are not material planning considerations. It is understood that the original 19th Century part of the existing, now vacant hotel building, was designed by a local architectural firm. However, the existing building on the site is not a listed building of special architectural or historic interest (and therefore it is not included on the statutory list of buildings) and the site is not within a conservation area. Irrespective of opinions of whether or not the building should be listed, Historic Environment Scotland , the authority responsible for listing buildings, will neither consider nor comment on the merits of listing a building whilst it is under consideration for development, including any building subject to a planning application or planning appeal. Under Section 3 and 4 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservations Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 a 'Building Preservation Notice' (BPN) may be served by the Council as Planning Authority if it appears that a building is of special architectural or historic merit and is in danger of demolition or alteration in such a way as to affect its character as a building of such interest. The BPN has the effect of temporarily listing the building which would subsequently require to be confirmed or rejected by the Secretary of State (now Scottish Ministers) after due consideration. Compensation can be claimed by any interested party who suffers 'loss or damage' attributable to the service of the BPN if the building is ultimately not listed (Section 26). Although the original (core) building may have some local historic and architectural merit (whether in terms of age and local architect connections) it is clear that any qualities of the building have been substantially diminished by the later addition of the large single and two storey flat roofed extensions onto three sides of the building. On balance and in this instance, it is not considered that the service of a BPN would be appropriate. At the time of their construction, the addition of the extension(s) was not considered to threaten or detract from any special historic and architectural character of the original building. Impact of removal of existing hotel building and design of the replacement shop unit (IMP1, PP3, Supplementary Planning Guidance: Urban Design (SPG)) In the absence of any basis to preclude demolition of the existing building, Policy IMP1 requires new development to be sensitively sited, designed and serviced and that its scale, density and character must be appropriate to the amenity of the surrounding area, etc. In addition, Policy PP3, together with the associated SPG on Urban Design, sets out place-making and key design principles for new development. In terms of siting, the proposal is located within the settlement of Lhanbryde, and it involves the redevelopment of an existing site, with demolition of the existing building and its replacement by a new building on the site. The proposed retail use, replacing the

existing commercial (hotel) use of the site, would be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area with retail and residential uses located along St Andrews Road, one of the main streets through Lhanbryde. The main road-side and car park frontages of the site are clearly defined, as is the rear of the site which comprises, and is enclosed by, a steep embankment with retaining walls. The eastern side of the site is also defined by retaining walls and a raised landscaped/graveyard area beyond. In design terms, the original part of the existing building (not the more recent large flat roofed additions) contributes to the traditional character of its setting within Lhanbryde. It is a two storey structure, with a slate roof and natural stone walling, and it has two main gable details which frame either end of the main façade of the building facing towards St Andrews Road. The replacement shop unit as proposed incorporates architectural elements and reflects the style and scale of the original building, and despite being set further back in the site, it is similarly sited over the footprint of the extended original building. Despite the building comprising only a single internal floor, a two-storey appearance is maintained by having an upper line of blank window recesses with feature wall-head dormers above and it replicates the details of the existing building by including two gable details at the western and eastern end of the new building facing onto St Andrews Road. The proposed slate, reclaimed stone (using downtakings from the existing building) and roughcast finishes are all sympathetic to, and in keeping with, the traditional character and setting of the original building. Conditions are recommended to ensure the external finishes remain appropriate to the development and its surroundings. In design terms, this latest submission is considered to be an improvement over the design approaches adopted in previous applications. Whilst accommodating requirements to enable the building to function and operate as a shop on a single (ground floor) level, greater attention has been given to the style and scale of the new building to ensure it is more reflective and in keeping with the original building (to be demolished) and its surroundings. Based on these considerations, the scale, design, siting and detailing of the proposed replacement building should make a similar contribution to the essential design qualities of its traditional setting as that of the original building and therefore, the proposal is considered acceptable in design terms. In terms of servicing, the arrangements for access and drainage are also acceptable (see below). Relative to Policy PP3 and the associated SPG, and in so far as relevant to the proposal, the key design principles are about movement and building design. In movement terms, the proposal caters for a range of transport modes and being located on a main thoroughfare within Lhanbryde, the site is accessible and well connected to the wider community. In building design terms and as noted above, the proposal is acceptable and it reflects and respects the identity and character of the place. A third principle about open space and landscaping is less relevant because this proposal is no different to the existing building/site wherein no (green) open space is provided or available within the site. The proposal does not encroach onto any green space areas to the north and east of the site. Overall, the proposal is considered to comply with Policy PP3 and SPG (as confirmed following consultation with the Council’s Planning and Development Service).

Provision of neighbourhood/local shop (R3, PP1) From Policy R3, proposals for neighbourhood and local shops will generally be acceptable in the circumstances set out in that policy. This includes the provision of small shops intended to primarily serve the convenience needs of a local neighbourhood within a settlement boundary. It is considered that the retail use as proposed satisfies this criterion and therefore is acceptable in terms of Policy R3, noting here that with a net retail and gross floorspace of 189 and 275sq m respectively, this unit would be of a size appropriate to fulfil a neighbourhood or local shop function, it is in a location accessible by car, public transport and on foot and it would contribute to the overall sustainability of an area and reduce the need to travel to large shopping centres for day to day requirements. In these terms, together with the proposed design being considered to safeguard the built environment, the proposal would also support the sustainable growth aims of Policy PP1. Impact on amenity of the locality (IMP1, EP8) On the road frontage to the west of the site, there is an existing house which has two small gable windows facing towards the car park of the proposed development. An existing boundary wall and the driveway to the house separate the house from the car park. The entrance to the new shop unit would be in the western elevation of the new building which faces towards the car park, and the neighbouring house is at a distance of approx. 30m plus the width of the intervening driveway. Taking into account an increased regular vehicular and pedestrian activity associated with the shop, the character of the area, the relationship of the existing hotel (and proposed) building and car park to the neighbouring house and the distances involved to the new shop entrance, it is not considered that there would be a material increase or significant adverse loss in residential amenity to that house from any increased activity arising from the use of the site as a shop. Therefore, there are no objections to the proposal in relation to the amenity impact upon that property (or to others in the vicinity). External refrigeration and air conditioning plant are proposed in the enclosed yard area at the eastern end of the building. Following consideration, the Environmental Health Manager has not objected to the proposals subject to a condition which specifies the acceptable levels of noise emissions from that plant so as not to have an unacceptable adverse impact on any nearby noise-sensitive property. Subject to the specified noise levels being observed at all times, no adverse amenity impact in noise pollution terms is considered to occur and on that basis the proposal is considered to comply with policy EP8 Access and Parking (T2, T5) The development proposal is for the re-development for a food store on a site which currently accommodates a commercial property with an access onto the public road. Following discussion and after consideration of revised drawings showing revised parking and cycle parking arrangements, and removal of bollards within the re-aligned public footway, the Transportation Manager has not objected to the proposal subject to a number of conditions as recommended including requirements for plans to manage traffic during the construction period and deliveries by service vehicles. The proposals include on-site parking provision of 17 car parking spaces (two of which would be disabled parking spaces), three cycle stands (to accommodate 6 cycles) and 1

motor cycle parking space. These arrangements are considered acceptable and satisfy both relevant parking standards and Policy T5. The proposed development is in close proximity to two existing bus stops and the existing access is on the same side of the road adjacent to the eastbound bus stop. The proposal includes the relocation of the access away from the eastbound bus stop, to which the Transportation Manager has not objected subject to a condition identifying design specifications for the relocated access. On this basis the proposals are considered to be acceptable and satisfy Policy T2. The proposals also include the construction of a new lay-by on the St Andrews Road frontage of the site to accommodate service vehicles. The lay-by would be subject to a Road Traffic Regulation Order which would restrict its use to service vehicles only. The Order will require to be promoted under separate legislation. The Transportation Manager has commented that on-street parking occurs at this location in association with the existing retail units and residential properties. However, by providing on-site parking for the shop unit to the Council’s parking standards, the proposed development is not anticipated to result in additional parking demand on the public road. Furthermore, the provision of the dedicated servicing lay-by would also be available for use by the existing retail properties on the southern side of the road which currently undertake servicing from the public road. On the basis of these considerations, it is not considered that the proposals would materially add to, or significantly increase, any existing problems of road congestion and road safety, and the Transportation Manager has not objected to the proposal in these terms. Drainage (EP10, EP5) As with the current use of the site, it is proposed that the development will connect to the public water and sewer supply networks, the latter being required by Policy EP10 given the location of the development within Lhanbryde. In the absence of any consultation response from Scottish Water to confirm the acceptability of these arrangements, it is the developer’s responsibility to secure the required connections to public utilities and ensure that adequate capacity within the networks is available. On-site provision for surface water drainage is provided via soakaways, including one located under the car park area: the acceptability of these arrangements will be assessed as part of the separate requirements for a Building Warrant for the development but in principle, the arrangements would satisfy the requirements of Policy EP5. Flooding (EP7, IMP1) The agent has provided information to assess the risk of flooding on the site including reference to existing levels at the site and surrounding area, and also in terms of the effect of completion of works associated with the Lhanbryde Flood Alleviation Scheme. The assessment concludes that there is little or no flood risk associated with the proposal. Following consultation, SEPA has not objected to the proposal on flood risk grounds noting the increased protection afforded by implementation of the Lhanbryde Flood Alleviation Scheme since 1997 and although the proposal would be considered to be a less vulnerable use, SEPA points out that the applicant should be aware that there remains a residual risk of flooding. Moray Flood Risk Management raise no objections to

the proposal subject to a construction phase surface water management plan being provided prior to start of construction, and a condition to this effect is recommended. On the basis of the information available, the proposal is acceptable in terms of Policies EP7 and IMP1. Conclusion and Recommendation The proposal is to demolish and replace an existing (vacant) hotel premises with a new build shop unit, a use that would satisfy retail planning policy and the proposed use would be consistent with the established commercial use of the site and the mixed commercial/ residential nature of the area. In terms of development requirements, the style and design including layout, scale, and finishes as proposed are reasonably sympathetic to the urban design characteristics and setting of the building, and there are no adverse impacts upon neighbouring residential amenity. In all other respects the proposals are considered acceptable and approval is recommended. REASON(S) FOR DECISION The Council’s reason(s) for making this decision are: - The proposal accords with the relevant policies of the Moray Local Development Plan 2015 and there are no material considerations that indicate otherwise. Author/Contact Officer:

Maurice Booth Planning Officer

Ext: 01343 563274

Beverly Smith Manager (Development Management)

APPENDIX POLICY Adopted Moray Local Development Plan 2015 Policy EP9: Contaminated Land Development proposals on potentially contaminated land will be approved provided that: a) The applicant can demonstrate through site investigations and risk assessment, that

the site is in a condition suitable for the proposed development and is not causing significant pollution of the environment; and

b) Where necessary, effective remediation measures are agreed to ensure the site is

made suitable for the new use and to ensure appropriate disposal and/or treatment of any hazardous material.

The Council recommends early contact with the Environmental Health Section, which can advise what level of information will need to be supplied. Policy IMP1: Developer Requirements New development will require to be sensitively sited, designed and serviced appropriate to the amenity of the surrounding area. It should comply with the following criteria a) The scale, density and character must be appropriate to the surrounding area. b) The development must be integrated into the surrounding landscape. c) Road, cycling, footpath and public transport must be provided at a level appropriate

to the development. Core paths; long distance footpaths; national cycle routes must not be adversely affected.

d) Acceptable water and drainage provision must be made, including the use of

sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) for dealing with surface water. e) Where of an appropriate scale, developments should demonstrate how they will

incorporate renewable energy systems, and sustainable design and construction. Supplementary Guidance will be produced to expand upon some of these criteria.

f) Make provision for additional areas of open space within developments. g) Details of arrangements for the long term maintenance of landscape areas and

amenity open spaces must be provided along with Planning applications. h) Conservation and where possible enhancement of natural and built environmental

resources must be achieved, including details of any impacts arising from the disturbance of carbon rich soil.

i) Avoid areas at risk of flooding, and where necessary carry out flood management measures.

j) Address any potential risk of pollution including ground water contamination in

accordance with recognised pollution prevention and control measures. k) Address and sufficiently mitigate any contaminated land issues. l) Does not sterilise significant workable reserves of minerals or prime quality

agricultural land. m) Make acceptable arrangements for waste management. Policy EP10: Foul Drainage All development within or close to settlements (as defined in the Local Development Plan) of more than 2,000 population equivalent will require to connect to the public sewerage system unless connection to the public sewer is not permitted due to lack of capacity. In such circumstances, temporary provision of private sewerage systems may be allowed provided Scottish Water has confirmed investment to address this constraint has been specifically allocated within its current Quality Standards Investment Programme and the following requirements apply: • Systems shall not have an adverse impact on the water environment; • Systems must be designed and built to a standard which will allow adoption by

Scottish Water. • Systems must be designed such that they can be easily connected to a public sewer

in the future. Typically this will mean providing a drainage line up to a likely point of connection.

All development within or close to settlements (as identified in the Local Development Plan) of less than 2000 population equivalent will require to connect to public sewerage system except where a compelling case is made otherwise. Factors to be considered in such a case will include size of the proposed development, whether the development would jeopardise delivery of public sewerage infrastructure and existing drainage problems within the area. Where a compelling case is made, a private system may be acceptable provided it does not pose or add risk of detrimental effect, including cumulative, to the natural and built environment, surrounding uses or amenity of the general area. Consultation with Scottish Environment Protection Agency will be undertaken in these cases. Where a private system is deemed to be acceptable (within settlements as above or small scale development in the countryside) a discharge to land (either full soakaway or raised mound soakaway) compatible with Technical Handbooks (which sets out guidance on how proposals may meet the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004) should be explored prior to considering a discharge to surface waters.

Policy T2: Provision of Access The Council will require that new development proposals are designed to provide the highest level of access for end users including residents, visitors, and deliveries appropriate to the type of development and location. Development must meet the following criteria: • Proposals must maximise connections and routes for pedestrian and cyclists,

including links to active travel and core path routes, to reduce travel demands and provide a safe and realistic choice of access.

• Provide access to public transport services and bus stop infrastructure where

appropriate. • Provide appropriate vehicle connections to the development, including appropriate

number and type of junctions. • Provide safe entry and exit from the development for all road users including

ensuring appropriate visibility for vehicles at junctions and bends. • Provide appropriate mitigation/modification to existing transport networks where

required to address the impacts of new development on the safety and efficiency of the transport network. This may include but would not be limited to, the following measures, passing places, road widening, junction enhancement, bus stop infrastructure and drainage infrastructure. A number of potential road improvements have been identified in association with the development of sites the most significant of these have been shown on the Settlement Map as TSPs.

• Proposals must avoid or mitigate against any unacceptable adverse landscape or

environmental impacts. Developers should give consideration to aspirational core paths (under Policy 2 of the Core Paths Plan) and active travel audits when preparing proposals. New development proposals should enhance permeability and connectivity, and ensure that opportunities for sustainable and active travel are protected and improved. The practicality of use of public transport in more remote rural areas will be taken into account however applicants should consider innovative solutions for access to public transport. When considered appropriate by the planning authority developers will be asked to submit a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan. Significant travel generating proposals will only be supported where: • Direct links to walking and cycling networks are available; • Access to public transport networks would involve walking no more than 400m; • It would not have a detrimental effect on the capacity of the strategic road and/or rail

network; and

• A Transport Assessment identifies satisfactory mechanisms for meeting sustainable

transport requirements and no detrimental impact to the performance of the overall network.

Access proposals that have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding landscape and environment that cannot be mitigated will be refused. Policy T5: Parking Standards Proposals for development must conform with the Council's current policy on parking standards. Policy EP7: Control of Development in Flood Risk Areas New development should not take place if it would be at significant risk of flooding from any source or would materially increase the possibility of flooding elsewhere. Proposals for development in areas considered to be at risk from flooding will only be permitted where a flood risk assessment to comply with the recommendations of National Guidance and to the satisfaction of both the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Council is provided by the applicant. This assessment must demonstrate that any risk from flooding can be satisfactorily mitigated without increasing flood risk elsewhere. Due to continuing changes in climatic patterns, the precautionary principle will apply when reviewing any application for an area at risk from inundation by floodwater. The following limitations on development will also be applied to take account of the degree of flooding as defined in Scottish Planning Policy; a) In areas of little to no risk (less than 0.1%) there will be no general constraint to

development. b) Areas of low to medium risk (0.1% to 0.5%) will be considered suitable for most

development. A flood risk assessment may be required at the upper end of the probability range (i.e. close to 0.5%), and for essential civil infrastructure and most vulnerable uses. Water resistant materials and construction may be required. Areas within this risk category will generally not be suitable for civil infrastructure. Where civil infrastructure must be located in these areas or is being substantially extended, it should be designed to be capable of remaining operational and accessible during extreme flooding events.

c) Areas of medium to high risk (0.5% or above) may be suitable for:

• Residential, institutional, commercial and industrial development within built up areas provided flood protection measures to the appropriate standard already exist and are maintained, are under construction, or are a planned measure in a current flood management plan;

• Essential infrastructure within built up areas, designed and constructed to

remain operational during floods and not impede water flow; • Some recreational, sport, amenity and nature conservation uses, provided

appropriate evacuation procedures are in place and

• Job related accommodation e.g. for caretakers or operational staff.

Areas within these risk categories will generally not be suitable: • Civil infrastructure and most vulnerable uses; • Additional development in undeveloped and sparsely developed areas, unless

a location is essential for operational reasons, e.g. for navigation and water based recreation, agriculture, transport or utilities infrastructure (which should be designed to be operational during floods and not impede water flow), and

• An alternative, lower risk location is not available and • New caravan and camping sites.

Where development is permitted, measures to protect against or manage flood risk will be required and any loss of flood storage capacity mitigated to achieve a neutral or better outcome. Water resistant materials and construction should be used where appropriate. Elevated buildings on structures such as stilts are unlikely to be acceptable. Policy R3: Neighbourhood & Local Shops, Ancillary Retailing, & Recreation or Tourist Related Retailing Proposals for Neighbourhood and Local Shops, Ancillary Retailing, and Recreation or Tourist Related Retailing will generally be acceptable in the following circumstances: a) small shops which are intended to primarily serve the convenience needs of a local

neighbourhood within a settlement boundary b) ancillary retail operations to an industrial or commercial business. In this case

ancillary is defined as up to 10% of total gross floorspace of the business, and up to 1000 square metres gross total of retail floorspace, where the retail operation is directly linked to the industrial or commercial production and where the goods are produced on the same premises.

c) farms or farm buildings for the retailing of farm produce, or, d) specialist retailing associated with an existing or proposed recreation or tourist

development and where the scale and function of the proposal is appropriate to the character of the area.

These types of retailing are exempt from the sequential assessment requirement but may, when requested by the Planning Authority, be required to demonstrate that they will not have an adverse effect on the vitality and viability of the identified network of centres. In all cases, satisfactory provision must be made to ensure that the environment is not compromised and that there is appropriate access and parking, and other service provision.

Primary Policy PP3: Placemaking All residential and commercial (business, industrial and retail) developments must incorporate the key principles of Designing Streets, Creating Places and the Council's supplementary guidance on Urban Design. Developments should; • create places with character, identity and a sense of arrival • create safe and pleasant places, which have been designed to reduce the fear of

crime and anti-social behaviour • be well connected, walkable neighbourhoods which are easy to move around and

designed to encourage social interaction and healthier lifestyles • include buildings and open spaces of high standards of design which incorporate

sustainable design and construction principles • have streets which are designed to consider pedestrians first and motor vehicles last

and minimise the visual impact of parked cars on the street scene. • ensure buildings front onto streets with public fronts and private backs and have

clearly defined public and private space • maintain and enhance the natural landscape features and distinctive character of the

area and provide new green spaces which connect to green and blue networks and promote biodiversity

• The Council will work with developers and local communities to prepare masterplans,

key design principles and other site specific planning guidance as indicated in the settlement designations.

Primary Policy PP1: Sustainable Economic Growth The Local Development Plan identifies employment land designations to support requirements identified in the Moray Economic Strategy. Development proposals which support the Strategy and will contribute towards the delivery of sustainable economic growth and the transition of Moray towards a low carbon economy will be supported where the quality of the natural and built environment is safeguarded and the relevant policies and site requirements are met. Policy EP5: Surface Water Drainage: Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) Surface water from development should be dealt with in a sustainable manner that has a neutral effect on the risk of flooding or which reduces the risk of flooding. The method of dealing with surface water should also avoid pollution and promote habitat enhancement and amenity. All sites should be drained by a sustainable drainage system (SUDS). Drainage systems should contribute to enhancing existing "blue" and "green" networks while contributing to place-making, biodiversity, recreational, flood risk and climate change objectives.

Specific arrangements should be made to avoid the issue of permanent SUD features becoming silted-up with construction phase runoff. Care must be taken to avoid the introduction of invasive non-native species during the construction of all SUD features. Applicants must agree provisions for long term maintenance of the SUDS scheme to the satisfaction of the Council in consultation with SEPA and Scottish Water as appropriate. A Drainage Assessment (DA) will be required for developments of 10 houses or more, industrial uses, and non-residential proposals of 500sq metres and above. The Council's Flood Team will prepare Supplementary Guidance on surface water drainage and flooding. Policy EP8: Pollution Planning applications for developments that may cause significant pollution in terms of noise (including RAF aircraft noise), air, water and light emissions will only be approved where a detailed assessment report on the levels, character and transmission of the potential pollution is provided by the applicant. The assessment should also demonstrate how the pollution can be appropriately mitigated. Where the Council applies conditions to the consent to deal with pollution matters these may include subsequent independent monitoring of pollution levels.