Item5Appendix2ScottishMinistersDecision20200077MSC_Redacted

Dir­ect­or­ate for Loc­al Gov­ern­ment and Com­munit­ies Plan­ning and Archi­tec­ture Divi­sion : Plan­ning Decisions

T: 0131 – 244 7589 E: [email protected]

Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment Riaghaltas na h‑Alba gov.scot

Bal­avil Estate Lim­ited c/​o Andrew Bayne ABC Plan­ning & Design Hill Of Morph­ie St Cyr­us Aber­deen­shire DD10 0AB

Our ref: NA-CNP-002 19 July 2019

Dear Mr Bayne

TOWN AND COUN­TRY PLAN­NING (SCOT­LAND) ACT 1997 PLAN­NING PER­MIS­SION IN PRIN­CIPLE FOR RELO­CA­TION OF BAL­AVIL HOME FARM (DUE TO THE DUALLING OF THE A9) AND CON­STRUC­TION OF NEW FARM BUILD­INGS, FARM­YARD, ASSO­CI­ATED UTILITIES/DRAINAGE, LAND­SCAPE AND ACCESS ROAD TO NEW FARM AT LAND EAST OF LYN­O­VOAN, LYN­CHAT, KINGUSSIE

1. This let­ter con­tains Scot­tish Min­is­ters’ decision on the above applic­a­tion sub­mit­ted to High­land Coun­cil by ABC Plan­ning & Design on behalf of Bal­avil Estate Lim­ited. The applic­a­tion was called-in by The Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity, and then called-in for Scot­tish Min­is­ters’ determination.

2. The applic­a­tion was con­sidered by Ms Allis­on Coard MA MPhil MRTPI, a report­er appoin­ted for that pur­pose on 2 Octo­ber 2018. The applic­a­tion was con­sidered by means of writ­ten rep­res­ent­a­tions and a site vis­it was car­ried out. A copy of the reporter’s report is enclosed.

Con­sid­er­a­tion by the Reporters’

1. The report­ers’ over­all con­clu­sions and recom­mend­a­tions are set out in Chapter 6.

Scot­tish Min­is­ters’ Decision

1. Scot­tish Min­is­ters have care­fully con­sidered the report. They agree with the reporter’s over­all con­clu­sions and recom­mend­a­tion and adopt them for the pur­pose of their own decision.

2. Accord­ingly, Scot­tish Min­is­ters grant plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple sub­ject to the attached con­di­tions for the relo­ca­tion of Bal­avil home farm and con­struc­tion of new farm build­ings, farm­yard, asso­ci­ated utilities/​drainage, land­scape and access road to new farm at, Land East of Lyn­o­voan, Lyn­chat, Kin­gussie, PH21 1LG.

3. The fore­go­ing decision of Scot­tish Min­is­ters is final, sub­ject to the right con­ferred by Sec­tions 237 and 239 of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997 of any per­son aggrieved by the decision to apply to the Court of Ses­sion with­in 6 weeks of the date here­of. On any such applic­a­tion the Court may quash the decision if sat­is­fied that it is not with­in the powers of the Act, or that the appellant’s interests have been sub­stan­tially pre­ju­diced by a fail­ure to com­ply with any require­ments of the Act, or of the Tribunals and Inquir­ies Act 1992, or any orders, reg­u­la­tions or rules made under these Acts.

4. A copy of this let­ter and the report has been sent to High­land Coun­cil, Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity and Trans­port Scot­land. Those parties who lodged rep­res­ent­a­tions will receive a copy of this letter.

Yours sin­cerely

PLAN­NING DECISIONS

CON­DI­TIONS ATTACHED TO THE GRANT OF PLAN­NING PER­MIS­SION IN PRINCIPLE

1. Pri­or to the com­mence­ment of devel­op­ment and to the sub­mis­sion for the approv­al of the mat­ters as spe­cified in con­di­tion 2 below a lay­out plan shall be sub­mit­ted to and approved in writ­ing by the plan­ning author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land and with High­land Coun­cil as Roads Author­ity. This lay­out plan should show:

The pro­posed pos­i­tion of build­ings, all ancil­lary devel­op­ment (includ­ing drain­age design and SUDS) and the pro­posed access along with the areas to be reserved free of devel­op­ment as neces­sary for the deliv­ery of the A9 Dualling Scheme. The areas to be retained free of devel­op­ment shall be iden­ti­fied in accord­ance with Areas A, B and C on the plan DMRB Stage 3 Bal­avil Access Plan” [Doc­u­ment TS018] as dock­eted to this plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple unless as oth­er­wise spe­cified and agreed in advance and in writ­ing by the plan­ning author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scotland.

There­after the devel­op­ment shall be car­ried out in accord­ance with the approved lay­out plan and the areas reserved for the deliv­ery of A9 Dualling Scheme shall be retained free of devel­op­ment unless and until it is oth­er­wise con­firmed in writ­ing with the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity, act­ing as plan­ning author­ity, in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land, that these areas are no longer required for that purpose.

Reas­on: To cla­ri­fy that the lay­out plan, access and drain­age details as sub­mit­ted as part of this applic­a­tion do not form part of this plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple. These mat­ters are reserved in order to safe­guard the land neces­sary for the deliv­ery of the nation­ally import­ant A9 Dualling Scheme and its asso­ci­ated envir­on­ment­al mitigation.

1. The sub­mis­sion for approv­al of mat­ters spe­cified in con­di­tions of this grant of plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple in accord­ance with the times­cales and oth­er lim­it­a­tions in sec­tion 59 of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997 (as amended) shall include the fol­low­ing mat­ters and shall be in accord­ance with the lay­out plan as approved through Con­di­tion One.

No work shall begin until the writ­ten approv­al of the plan­ning author­ity has been giv­en on these mat­ters and there­after the devel­op­ment shall be car­ried out in accord­ance with that approval.

a) Design, sit­ing and extern­al appear­ance of build­ings, open space and any oth­er struc­tures; b) a con­tour base plan to demon­strate a good fit of the pro­posed lay­out of build­ings and all ancil­lary devel­op­ment (includ­ing drain­age pro­vi­sion and SUDs) with land­form and loc­al hydro­logy c) Exist­ing and fin­ished ground levels in rela­tion to Ord­nance Datum; d) A min­im­um of 6 detailed sec­tions through the site north/​south and east/​west, extend­ing bey­ond the red line bound­ary to demon­strate a good fit with land­form. e) the pro­posed access track and its sur­face treat­ment show­ing all asso­ci­ated cut/​fill, earth strength­en­ing and/​or retain­ing struc­tures and a good fit with land­form. f) A detailed spe­cific­a­tion of all extern­al mater­i­als – note: samples may be required; g) Detailed land­scap­ing plan with full spe­cific­a­tion for on-site and any off­s­ite plant­ing. All spe­cies should be nat­ive, typ­ic­al of the area, and of loc­al proven­ance. New plant­ing should screen/​filter views from the A9, include plant­ing with­in the build­ing cluster to enhance the imme­di­ate envir­on­ment and reflect exist­ing tree and wood­land fea­tures in the land­scape. The Land­scape Plan shall be imple­men­ted in full dur­ing the first plant­ing sea­son fol­low­ing com­mence­ment of devel­op­ment. h) A Long term land­scape main­ten­ance sched­ule and man­age­ment plan for all plant­ing areas; i) Tree sur­vey, arbor­i­cul­tur­al impact assess­ment and tree pro­tec­tion plan for the site, the tree-covered knoll north-east of the site and along the route of the access in order to demon­strate that the key wood­land and tree char­ac­ter­ist­ics of this land­scape will be con­served and enhanced. j) Bound­ary treat­ments includ­ing heights and mater­i­als; I) Design and sit­ing of farm and vis­it­or vehicle park­ing; m) Drain­age Impact Assess­ment; n) Final Drain­age Plan includ­ing SUDS scheme and SUDS main­ten­ance plan, per­col­a­tion tests at the loc­a­tion of any infilt­ra­tion fea­tures, and design cal­cu­la­tions provided for 30 year and 200 year return peri­ods plus cli­mate change storm events; o) Light­ing plan to min­im­ise light spillage and light pol­lu­tion; p) Bird and bat box plan; q) Con­struc­tion meth­od state­ment that incor­por­ates the mit­ig­a­tion iden­ti­fied in the Pre­lim­in­ary Eco­lo­gic­al Apprais­al; r) Waste man­age­ment and recyc­ling facilities;

The devel­op­ment shall be imple­men­ted in accord­ance with those approved details unless oth­er­wise approved in writ­ing by the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity and be retained and main­tained for the life­time of the devel­op­ment hereby approved.

ADVIS­ORY NOTES

1. Notice of the start of devel­op­ment: The per­son car­ry­ing out the devel­op­ment must give advance notice in writ­ing to the plan­ning author­ity of the date when it is inten­ded to start. Fail­ure to do so is a breach of plan­ning con­trol. It could res­ult in the plan­ning author­ity tak­ing enforce­ment action. (See sec­tions 27A and 123(1) of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997 (as amended).)

2. Notice of the com­ple­tion of the devel­op­ment: As soon as pos­sible after it is fin­ished, the per­son who com­pleted the devel­op­ment must write to the plan­ning author­ity to con­firm the pos­i­tion. (See sec­tion 27B of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997 (as amended).)

3. Dis­play of notice: A notice must be dis­played on or near the site while work is being car­ried out. The plan­ning author­ity can provide more inform­a­tion about the form of that notice and where to dis­play it. (See sec­tion 27C of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997 Act (as amended) and Sched­ule 7 to the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment Pro­ced­ure) (Scot­land) Reg­u­la­tions 2013.)

SCHED­ULE OF PLANS 013 Loc­a­tion Plan Plan as dock­eted to Con­di­tion 1 above ​“DMRB Stage 3 Bal­avil Access Plan” [Doc­u­ment TS018]. Pre­lim­in­ary Eco­lo­gic­al Appraisal

Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Appeals Division

Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment Riaghaltas na h‑Alba gov.scot Report to the Scot­tish Ministers

TOWN AND COUN­TRY PLAN­NING (SCOT­LAND) ACT 1997

Report by Allis­on Coard, a report­er appoin­ted by the Scot­tish Ministers

• Case ref­er­ence: NA-CNP-002 • Site Address: New Farm, Land East of Lyn­o­voan, Lyn­chat, Kin­gussie, PH21 1LG • Applic­a­tion by Bal­avil Estate Lim­ited • Applic­a­tion for plan­ning per­mis­sion (in prin­ciple)], ref. 2018/0354/PPP dated 24 Septem­ber 2018 called-in by notice dated 13 Decem­ber 2018 • The devel­op­ment pro­posed: relo­ca­tion of Bal­avil home farm (due to the dualling of the A9) and con­struc­tion of new farm build­ings, farm­yard, asso­ci­ated utilities/​drainage, land­scape and access road to new farm • Date of accom­pan­ied site vis­it: 24 April 2019

Date of this report and recom­mend­a­tion: Grant Plan­ning Per­mis­sion in Prin­ciple sub­ject to con­di­tions 18 June 2019

Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Appeals Divi­sion 4 The Court­yard, Cal­l­en­dar Busi­ness Park, Falkirk, FK1 1XR www.gov.scot/policies/planning-environmental-appeals

CON­TENTS

Page Sum­mary Report 2 Pre­amble 4

Chapters

1. Back­ground 5
2. Legis­lat­ive and Policy Con­text 7
3. Case for the Applic­ant 10
4. Case for the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity 13
5. Case for Trans­port Scot­land 14
6. Reporter’s con­clu­sions and recom­mend­a­tion 18

Appen­dices Appendix 1: Reporter’s recom­men­ded con­di­tions and Sched­ule of Plans Appendix 2: Writ­ten Submissions

NA-CNP-002 1

Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Appeals Divi­sion Sum­mary of Report into Called-In Plan­ning Application

Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment Riaghaltas na h‑Alba gov.scot

Plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple for relo­ca­tion of Bal­avil home farm (due to the dualling of the A9) and con­struc­tion of new farm build­ings, farm­yard, asso­ci­ated utilities/​drainage, land­scape and access road to new farm at New Farm, Land East of Lyn­o­voan, Lyn­chat, Kin­gussie, PH21 1LG.

• Case ref­er­ence NA-CNP-002 • Case type Plan­ning Per­mis­sion in Prin­ciple • Report­er Allis­on Coard • Applic­ant Bal­avil Estate Lim­ited • Plan­ning author­ity Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity • Oth­er parties Trans­port Scot­land • Date of applic­a­tion 24 Septem­ber 2018 • Date case received by DPEA 13 Decem­ber 2018 • Meth­od of con­sid­er­a­tion and Writ­ten sub­mis­sions and accom­pan­ied site date inspec­tion on 24 April 2019.

• Date of report 18 June 2019 • Reporter’s recom­mend­a­tion Grant plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple sub­ject to conditions.

Applicant’s Case

The only mat­ter in dis­pute is the objec­tion of Trans­port Scot­land with regard to the impact of the farm re-loc­a­tion pro­pos­als on the A9 Dualling Pro­ject between Cruben­more and Kincraig.

How­ever, the land required can be avoided and this can be secured by plan­ning con­di­tion. This is an applic­a­tion for plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple and a con­di­tion sub­ject to the pri­or approv­al of the plan­ning author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land could restrict any devel­op­ment that did not align with the A9 project.

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Authority’s case

The recom­mend­a­tion to approve the applic­a­tion for plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple was con­di­tioned on fur­ther details to demon­strate align­ment with the A9 dualling pro­pos­als as well as approv­al in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. This approach safe­guards the deliv­ery of the A9 Dualling Scheme.

Trans­port Scotland

The plan­ning applic­a­tion impacts on the fol­low­ing ele­ments of the pro­posed A9 Dualling Scheme:

NA-CNP-002 2

• Deliv­ery of the north­bound car­riage­way • An access track to Lyn­voan Cot­tage, which also forms part of a new shared Non- Motor­ised User facil­ity • The diver­sion of an unnamed water­course lying to the south of Lyn­voan Cot­tage and passing under the exist­ing A9 at this loc­a­tion • Envir­on­ment­al mit­ig­a­tion includ­ing nat­ive wood­land plant­ing, mam­mal fen­cing and noise mitigation.

The A9 pro­ject is of nation­al import­ance as ref­er­enced in the Nation­al Plan­ning Frame­work. The details are now sig­ni­fic­antly advanced and any devel­op­ment that would pre­ju­dice its deliv­ery should be avoided.

Reporter’s Con­clu­sions

The pro­pos­al is in accord­ance with the devel­op­ment plan. Min­is­ters com­mit­ment to the com­ple­tion of the A9 dualling is as expressed through the Nation­al Plan­ning Frame­work and oth­er nation­al policy doc­u­ments. This roads scheme has now advanced to draft orders stage and through pre­par­a­tion of an envir­on­ment­al assess­ment. Con­sequently, I con­sider that any approv­al of this cur­rent plan­ning applic­a­tion should be con­di­tion­al on a clear demon­stra­tion that pre­ju­dice to the deliv­ery of this roads scheme can be avoided.

The applic­a­tion is for plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple and I con­sider there is scope for revi­sion of the lay­out and sit­ing of build­ings and ancil­lary works. In any event the sus­pens­ive nature of the pro­posed con­di­tions would pre­vent devel­op­ment pro­ceed­ing until these mat­ters have been resolved and approved in writ­ing by the plan­ning author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. The word­ing of the pro­posed con­di­tion, when read with the attached plan, iden­ti­fies those areas that should be retained free of devel­op­ment. With this pro­vi­sion I con­sider that the land neces­sary for the deliv­ery of the nation­ally import­ant A9 Dualling Scheme and its asso­ci­ated envir­on­ment­al mit­ig­a­tion would be safeguarded.

Recom­mend­a­tion

I recom­mend that plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple is gran­ted sub­ject to the two con­di­tions as lis­ted in Appendix 1.

NA-CNP-002 3

The Scot­tish Min­is­ters Edin­burgh Ministers

Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Appeals Divi­sion 4 The Court­yard Cal­l­en­dar Busi­ness Park Cal­l­en­dar Road Falkirk FK1 1XR DPEA case ref­er­ence: NA-CNP-002

This applic­a­tion is for con­struc­tion of new farm build­ings, farm­yard, asso­ci­ated utilities/​drainage, land­scape and access road on land east of Lyn­o­voan, Lyn­chat, by Kin­gussie. It was noti­fied to Scot­tish Min­is­ters as there was an objec­tion from Trans­port Scot­land and as the Cairngorm Nation­al Park Author­ity inten­ded to grant plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple. The applic­a­tion was called in by Scot­tish Min­is­ters on the 13 Decem­ber 2018 giv­en its pos­sible implic­a­tions for the nation­ally import­ant dualling scheme on the A9.

In pre­par­ing this report I sought fur­ther writ­ten sub­mis­sions on the mat­ters sum­mar­ised below whilst reserving the pos­sib­il­ity of a hear­ing process.

Giv­en the require­ments of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Envir­on­ment­al Impact Assess­ment) (Scot­land) Reg­u­la­tions 2017 (“the EIA reg­u­la­tions”) I reques­ted fur­ther inform­a­tion to determ­ine wheth­er form­al screen­ing was required and to obtain the inform­a­tion neces­sary to enable that pro­cess. Giv­en the sites loc­a­tion with­in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park, which is defined in the reg­u­la­tions as a ​“sens­it­ive area”, I issued a Screen­ing Dir­ec­tion on behalf of Scot­tish Min­is­ters dated 9 April 2019. This con­cluded that in this case the pro­pos­al does not con­sti­tute Envir­on­ment­al Impact Assess­ment development.

At the same time I sought fur­ther cla­ri­fic­a­tion of the con­cerns raised by Trans­port Scot­land regard­ing any implic­a­tions for the pro­posed works to the A9. This sought sup­port­ing evid­ence (includ­ing map­ping) to cla­ri­fy the extent of any over­lap between the two pro­pos­als. It also sought to cla­ri­fy wheth­er or not the mat­ters in dis­pute could be addressed through plan­ning con­di­tions and at the detailed plan­ning stage (giv­en this is an applic­a­tion for plan­ning per­mis­sion in principle).

In a fur­ther pro­ced­ure notice dated 2 April 2019 I con­firmed that sub­ject to some minor cla­ri­fic­a­tion as to the final pos­i­tion of parties and on the sug­ges­ted word­ing for con­di­tions a hear­ing was not required. The writ­ten exchanges then con­cluded on 18 April 2019 and an accom­pan­ied site vis­it, which was atten­ded by the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity, the applic­ant and Trans­port Scot­land, was held on 24 April 2019.

My report takes account of all the rel­ev­ant sub­mis­sions togeth­er with my obser­va­tions on site.

NA-CNP-002 4

CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND

Site loc­a­tion and descrip­tion 1.1 The applic­a­tion site is on the oppos­ite (north) side of the A9 from the small vil­lage of Lyn­chat where the exist­ing farm build­ings are cur­rently loc­ated. The site is on a gently slop­ing ter­race above the A9 and has an estab­lished wood­land on a knoll to the north-east, rel­at­ively recent wood­land plant­ing to the north, sur­round­ing farm­land and an estate cot­tage at Lynoavan to the west. The land is owned by Bal­avil Estate Limited.

Con­sulta­tion Responses 1.2 Scot­tish Water: has no objec­tion to the pro­posed devel­op­ment. 1.3 High­land Coun­cil Flood Risk Man­age­ment Team: has no objec­tion to the pro­posed devel­op­ment but requests that a con­di­tion is added to ensure the final drain­age plan, includ­ing per­col­a­tion tests at the loc­a­tion of any infilt­ra­tion fea­tures, and design cal­cu­la­tions provided for 30 year and 200 year return peri­ods plus cli­mate change storm events, is sub­mit­ted for approv­al pri­or to devel­op­ment. 1.4 High­land Coun­cil Trans­port Plan­ning Team: has no objec­tion in prin­ciple to the pro­posed devel­op­ment, as any impact on Coun­cil roads will be a tem­por­ary one from con­struc­tion traffic. 1.5 Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity (CNPA) Eco­logy officer: is sat­is­fied that the sup­port­ing inform­a­tion and pre­lim­in­ary eco­lo­gic­al apprais­al provides sound inform­a­tion for decision mak­ing and iden­ti­fied a range of meas­ures to be incor­por­ated in con­di­tions. 1.6 CNPA Land­scape officer: notes that the loc­al land­scape and visu­al impacts as well as adverse impacts on spe­cial land­scape qual­it­ies of the pro­posed devel­op­ment can be reduced to an insig­ni­fic­ant level through sens­it­ive sit­ing, high qual­ity design, mit­ig­a­tion plan­ning and ongo­ing man­age­ment. They note that the need for crit­ic­al mit­ig­a­tion plan­ning between the site and the A9 may con­strain the devel­op­ment. 1.7 CNPA Out­door Access officer: notes that although a core path (LBS146) runs south and west from the edge of the pro­posed devel­op­ment site towards Raitts sou­ter­rain and Raitts set­tle­ment, this is out­side the devel­op­ment site and would only be affected by con­struc­tion traffic (using the cur­rent A9 under­pass or poten­tially a new under­pass in future). A con­di­tion can be used to ensure safe pub­lic access is main­tained on the core path. 1.8 Trans­port Scot­land: object to the applic­a­tion because it over­laps some areas of land they have iden­ti­fied for com­puls­ory pur­chase and con­sider that it impacts on: a) Deliv­ery of the north­bound car­riage­way; b) An access track to Lyn­voan Cot­tage, which also forms part of a new shared Non- Motor­ised User facil­ity; c) The diver­sion of an unnamed water­course lying to the south of Lyn­voan Cot­tage and passing under the exist­ing A9 at this loc­a­tion; d) Envir­on­ment­al mit­ig­a­tion includ­ing nat­ive wood­land plant­ing, mam­mal fen­cing and noise mitigation.

NA-CNP-002 5

Rep­res­ent­a­tions 1.9 No rep­res­ent­a­tions have been received on the application.

Council’s inten­ded decision pri­or to call-in 1.10 At its plan­ning com­mit­tee of 9 Novem­ber 2018 the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity resolved to grant plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple sub­ject to con­di­tions and noti­fic­a­tion to Scot­tish Min­is­ters. This decision fol­lowed the recom­mend­a­tion in the officer’s report of hand­ling that:

The pro­posed devel­op­ment is con­sidered to com­ply fully with the policies of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015 with appro­pri­ate con­di­tions attached. It is not clear from Trans­port Scotland’s objec­tion that the detail of the pro­posed scheme can­not resolve their con­cerns, nor that fur­ther dia­logue between the applic­ant and Trans­port Scot­land might also find accept­able solu­tions to both parties. On that basis officers recom­mend approv­al of the applic­a­tion sub­ject to con­di­tions and noti­fic­a­tion of the applic­a­tion to Scot­tish Ministers.

Call In Let­ter and Dir­ec­tion 1.11 Fol­low­ing noti­fic­a­tion as ref­er­enced above the Scot­tish Min­is­ters decided on 13 Decem­ber 2018 to require the applic­a­tion to be referred to them for determ­in­a­tion. The Dir­ec­tion was giv­en in view of the pro­posed development’s pos­sible implic­a­tions for the nation­ally import­ant dualling scheme on the A9.

NA-CNP-002 6

CHAPTER 2: LEGIS­LAT­IVE AND POLICY CONTEXT

Legis­lat­ive Con­text 2.1 My assess­ment is car­ried out with regard to the devel­op­ment plan and oth­er mater­i­al plan­ning con­sid­er­a­tions in accord­ance with sec­tion 25 of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997.

Devel­op­ment Plan Con­text. 2.2 The rel­ev­ant devel­op­ment plan con­text is estab­lished through the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2015: 2.3 Policy 2: Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth Pro­pos­als which sup­port or extend the eco­nomy or enhance the range and qual­ity of eco­nom­ic oppor­tun­it­ies or facil­it­ies will be con­sidered favour­ably where it is com­pat­ible with the exist­ing busi­ness activ­ity in the area and sup­ports the vital­ity and viab­il­ity of the loc­al eco­nomy and broad­er eco­nomy of the Nation­al Park.

Policy 3: Sus­tain­able Design This mainly applies to the require­ment for all devel­op­ment to address any effects on cli­mate change, the tra­di­tion­al pat­tern and char­ac­ter of the sur­round­ing area, appro­pri­ate sit­ing and land­scap­ing and appro­pri­ate access includ­ing through the path network.

Policy 4: Nat­ur­al Her­it­age Applies pro­tec­tion to a hier­archy of inter­na­tion­al and nation­al des­ig­na­tions, oth­er import­ant nat­ur­al her­it­age sites and interests, pro­tec­ted spe­cies and wider biod­iversity object­ives with ref­er­ence to appro­pri­ate mit­ig­a­tion and com­pens­at­ory provision.

Policy 5: Land­scape Pre­sumes against devel­op­ment which does not con­serve and enhance the land­scape char­ac­ter and spe­cial qual­it­ies of the Nation­al Park and in par­tic­u­lar the set­ting of the pro­posed devel­op­ment unless any sig­ni­fic­ant adverse effects are out­weighed by bene­fits of nation­al import­ance or where the adverse effects are suf­fi­ciently mitigated.

Policy 10: Resources This requires min­im­isa­tion of use of abstrac­ted water, pro­tec­tion of water qual­ity and the eco­lo­gic­al status of water bod­ies, that flood­ing issues are addressed and appro­pri­ate buf­fer zones retained around water courses. Cul­vert­ing should be avoided as should unne­ces­sary engin­eer­ing works appro­pri­ate pro­vi­sion should be made for sew­er­age includ­ing con­nec­tion to the pub­lic net­work unless risks can be addressed and sub­ject to appro­pri­ate waste man­age­ment and minimisation.

There is no dir­ect ref­er­ence in the devel­op­ment plan to the A9 dualling, but it is rel­ev­ant to note that the accom­pa­ny­ing text to Policy 2 (Sup­port­ing Eco­nom­ic Growth) NA-CNP-002 7

states an aim to ensure that all devel­op­ment oppor­tun­it­ies are sup­por­ted by ​‘fit for pur­pose’ infra­struc­ture, enabling access to the wider eco­nomy both with­in the Nation­al Park as well as con­nect­ing to the wider country.

Oth­er rel­ev­ant policy doc­u­ments 2.4 The fol­low­ing doc­u­ments are also con­sidered rel­ev­ant giv­en they are ref­er­enced in the sub­mis­sions of Trans­port Scot­land to sup­port its pos­i­tion that the pri­or­ity and status of the pro­posed A9 dualling scheme is a mater­i­al con­sid­er­a­tion. 2.5 The Nation­al Plan­ning Frame­work (NPF3), June 2014: Under ​“Spa­tial pri­or­it­ies for change” NPF3 sets out an aim to have bet­ter con­nec­ted cit­ies, not­ing that the road net­work has “…an essen­tial role to play in con­nect­ing cit­ies by car, pub­lic trans­port and act­ive travel…” and stat­ing “…we will com­plete the dualling of the trunk roads between cit­ies, with the dualling of the A9 between Perth and Inverness by 2025…” (sec­tion 5.20). In addi­tion NPF3 states that the dualling will “…provide a step change in access­ib­il­ity across the rur­al north, increase busi­ness con­fid­ence and sup­port invest­ment in the region…” (sec­tion 5.32). 2.6 Scot­tish Plan­ning Policy 2014: This includes the out­come ​“a more con­nec­ted place” in line with NPF3 and sets out how that should be delivered on the ground not­ing “…improved con­nec­tions facil­it­ate access­ib­il­ity with­in and between places – with­in Scot­land and bey­ond – and sup­port eco­nom­ic growth and an inclus­ive soci­ety…” (sec­tion 23). The SPP also includes a pre­sump­tion in favour of devel­op­ment that con­trib­utes to sus­tain­able devel­op­ment includ­ing a guid­ing prin­ciple for policies and decisions that “…sup­port deliv­ery of infra­struc­ture, for example trans­port …” (sec­tion 29) 2.7 Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan 2017 – 2022: With regard to Pri­or­ity 4: Vis­it­or Infra­struc­ture and Inform­a­tion it states that “…the dualling of the A9 will bring oppor­tun­it­ies and chal­lenges over the next dec­ade and that it is import­ant to max­im­ise the bene­fits both dur­ing con­struc­tion and oper­a­tion…” (page 46). 2.8 In con­sid­er­a­tion of Pri­or­ity 5: Act­ive Cairngorms, the NPPP also recog­nises that “…the dualling of the A9 provides the oppor­tun­ity to improve access infra­struc­ture and pro­mo­tion to encour­age more act­ive travel both by res­id­ents and vis­it­ors…” (page 50). 2.9 Under the head­ing Com­munity Capa­city and Empower­ment the doc­u­ment states we will “…estab­lish /​collaboration over a focused time peri­od to the Dal­whin­nie, Kin­gussie, Lag­gan and New­ton­more area from ²⁰¹⁹⁄₂₀, mak­ing the most of invest­ment in the A9..” (Page 67). 2.10 The doc­u­ment states that as part of the Eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment of the Nation­al Park action should be taken to “…max­im­ise the oppor­tun­it­ies for busi­ness, com­munit­ies and vis­it­ors from the A9 Dualling pro­ject…” (page 70) 2.11 As part of the over­all Rur­al Devel­op­ment Policy Frame­work, Policy 3.2 (page 74) aims to assist with achiev­ing Pri­or­ity 9: Eco­nom­ic Devel­op­ment, and states that “…sens­it­ively designed improve­ments to the A9 will be sup­por­ted as an integ­ral part of enhan­cing the con­nectiv­ity of the High­lands…” and the A9 dualling is highlighted

NA-CNP-002 8

2.12 Pro­posed Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2020: The plan states that pro­pos­als to dual the A9 will strengthen and improve con­nec­tions around the park (page 13). 2.13 The Stra­tegic Trans­port Pro­jects Review 2008/2009: The stra­tegic busi­ness case for the A9 Dualling Pro­gramme was estab­lished by the Scot­tish Government’s Stra­tegic Trans­port Pro­jects Review. This presen­ted both the upgrad­ing of the A9 between Dun­blane and Inverness and rail enhance­ments on the High­land Main Line between Perth and Inverness as stra­tegic trans­port invest­ments to sup­port the deliv­ery of the Scot­tish Government’s Pur­pose. 2.14 The Nation­al Trans­port Strategy 2016: On page 29 this reaf­firms Scot­tish Min­is­ters com­mit­ment to invest­ing in the A9 dualling between Perth and Inverness by 2025 (page 21). It sets out the fol­low­ing stra­tegic outcomes:

• ​‘improve jour­ney times and con­nec­tions, to tackle con­ges­tion and the lack of integ­ra­tion and con­nec­tions in trans­port which impact on high level object­ives for eco­nom­ic growth, social inclu­sion, integ­ra­tion and safety; • reduce emis­sions, to tackle the issues of cli­mate change, air qual­ity and health improve­ment which impact on high-level object­ives for pro­tect­ing the envir­on­ment and improv­ing health; and • improve qual­ity, access­ib­il­ity, and afford­ab­il­ity, giv­ing people a choice of pub­lic trans­port where avail­ab­il­ity means bet­ter qual­ity ser­vices and value for money, provid­ing an altern­at­ive to the car.’ (page 2) 2.15 Scotland’s Eco­nom­ic Strategy, March 2015: Scotland’s Eco­nom­ic Strategy is the most recent eco­nom­ic strategy for Scot­land and sets out an over-arch­ing frame­work for how the Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment aims to increase com­pet­it­ive­ness and tackle inequal­ity in Scot­land. It sets out the stra­tegic dir­ec­tion for cur­rent and future Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment Policy. The doc­u­ment states that a cent­ral fea­ture of the strategy is the approach to sup­port­ing invest­ment includ­ing stra­tegic and long term invest­ment in infra­struc­ture such as “…invest­ment to dual the A9…” (page 40). 2.16 TACT­RAN Region­al Trans­port Strategy Refresh 2015 – 2036: This includes Stra­tegic Con­nectiv­ity Strategy 6 (SC6) to ​“work with Trans­port Scot­land to sup­port deliv­ery of STPR pro­jects to upgrade the A9 between Dun­blane and Inverness…”. (sec­tion 5.1). 2.17 The High­land Coun­cil Loc­al Trans­port Strategy, ²⁰¹⁰⁄₁₁ – ²⁰¹³⁄₁₄: This ref­er­ences improve­ments to the A9 as import­ant to sat­is­fy demand and cre­ate new oppor­tun­it­ies for jobs. Dualling south of Inverness is a stated priority.

NA-CNP-002 9

CHAPTER 3: THE APPLICANT’S CASE

Mat­ters in dis­pute 3.1 It should be noted that the fol­low­ing are the exact and only mat­ters of objec­tion by Trans­port Scotland:

• The impact on the pro­pos­als for the A9 Dualling Cruben­more to Kin­craig pro­ject (Draft Orders for this pro­ject were pub­lished on 4 Septem­ber 2018). • The plan­ning applic­a­tion pro­pos­als over­lap with plots 728 and 801 of The A9 and A86 Trunk Roads (Cruben­more to Kin­craig) Com­puls­ory Pur­chase Order 201[ ]. • There is also an impact on plot 207 of the A9 and A86 Trunk Road (Cruben­more to Kin­craig) (Side Roads) Order 201[]. 3.2 More spe­cific­ally, that the plan­ning applic­a­tion impacts on the fol­low­ing ele­ments of the pro­posed scheme:

• Deliv­ery of the north­bound car­riage­way • An access track to Lyn­voan Cot­tage, which also forms part of a new shared Non- Motor­ised User facil­ity • The diver­sion of an unnamed water­course lying to the south of Lyn­voan Cot­tage and passing under the exist­ing A9 at this loc­a­tion • Envir­on­ment­al mit­ig­a­tion includ­ing nat­ive wood­land plant­ing, mam­mal fen­cing and noise mit­ig­a­tion. 3.3 There are no oth­er mat­ters in dispute.

Jus­ti­fic­a­tion and Agree­ment 3.4 The pre­vi­ous present­a­tion to the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity explained that:

• The land required for the deliv­ery of the north­bound car­riage­way can be avoided. • The detailed design can avoid any impact on the pro­posed non-motor­ised access pro­vi­sion to Lyn­voan Cot­tage. • In terms of the unnamed water­course there is a minor over­lap but there is oppor­tun­ity to retain build­ings to the north­ern two thirds of the site and to design land­scape and drain­age in accord­ance with the A9 pro­pos­als. • In terms of the wood­land plant­ing pro­vi­sion required to mit­ig­ate the impact of the A9 pro­pos­als con­flict with the pro­posed access track could be avoided by using altern­at­ive sites. 3.5 The nature of the applic­a­tion and the con­di­tions as pro­posed and agreed with the Nation­al Park Author­ity would enable the final pro­pos­al to align with Trans­port Scotland’s A9 dualling pro­pos­als. 3.6 The con­di­tions lis­ted spe­cific­ally require the approv­al of details by the Cairngorm Nation­al Park Author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. This con­di­tion is cat­egor­ic­al in estab­lish­ing that per­mis­sion for a detailed lay­out will only be approved if, and only if, the plan can ​“demon­strate align­ment“ with the A9 project.

NA-CNP-002 10

3.7 Fol­low­ing Scot­tish Min­is­ters’ inten­tion to call-in the applic­a­tion it was re-iter­ated, to the park author­ity, that work was ongo­ing with Trans­port Scot­land to ensure there is no impact on the deliv­ery of the A9 Scheme. This com­mu­nic­a­tion detailed the good work­ing rela­tion­ship with Trans­port Scot­land and its A9 pro­ject team and con­firmed that there would be no impact on the deliv­ery of the north­bound car­riage­way, the access track to Lyn­voan Cot­tage and the diver­sion of the unnamed water­course. 3.8 In rela­tion to the impact upon the A9 dualling project’s nat­ive wood­land plant­ing pro­posed agree­ment could be reached on altern­at­ive areas for new plant­ing, so the farm will not impact on the deliv­ery of the scheme. 3.9 The relo­ca­tion of the farm is crit­ic­al to the future of the Estate, its long-term man­age­ment and suc­cess­ful oper­a­tion and there are no altern­at­ive sites. In this con­text the details of the devel­op­ment and lay­out must, and will, be designed in a way that accords with good prac­tice, min­im­ises land­scape and envir­on­ment­al impacts and com­plies with the require­ments on all mat­ters spe­cified in con­di­tions. 3.10 A draft minute of agree­ment dated 27 Feb­ru­ary 2019 details the arrange­ments to be imple­men­ted to ensure the deliv­ery of the A9 dualling scheme and allow both devel­op­ments to pro­ceed along­side one anoth­er. Fur­ther writ­ten sub­mis­sions indic­ated that mat­ters had been agreed with Trans­port Scot­land to the extent that there would be no impact on the A9 dualling scheme. On this basis it is con­sidered that the agreed pos­i­tion on the mat­ters in dis­pute with­in the con­text of this cur­rent plan­ning applic­a­tion should allow Trans­port Scotland’s objec­tion to be resolved. This would allow relo­ca­tion of the farm build­ings. Trans­port Scot­land should with­draw its objec­tion on this basis. 3.11 Clos­ing sub­mis­sions then con­firmed that the ref­er­enced agree­ment was a con­trac­tu­al agree­ment and that there was no sug­ges­tion that this could be part of an agree­ment under sec­tion 75 of the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning (Scot­land) Act 1997.

Pro­posed Con­di­tions 3.12 In response to the detailed word­ing of con­di­tions as pro­posed by Trans­port Scot­land in place of those already recom­men­ded by the park author­ity con­di­tion a) was con­sidered accept­able. 3.13 In ref­er­ence to the reporter’s ques­tion as to wheth­er the con­di­tions were suf­fi­ciently pre­cise the word­ing ​“the areas of land with­in the applic­a­tion site which are required for the deliv­ery of the A9 dualling scheme” is con­sidered suf­fi­ciently pre­cise and clear as it refers to a plan with spe­cif­ic and well defined areas with clear bound­ar­ies. 3.14 Con­di­tion (a) as sug­ges­ted states that the land ​“shall be safe­guarded and kept free of all devel­op­ment unless oth­er­wise agreed in writ­ing with the Plan­ning Author­ity, in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land”. This would pro­tect the land from any devel­op­ment that would threaten the deliv­ery of the A9 dualling scheme, but at the same time allow­ing cer­tain works to pro­gress, if agreed with the plan­ning author­ity, in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. This approach would fol­low the agree­ment reached between the applic­ant and Trans­port Scot­land. It would meet the 6 tests for con­di­tions, as required by Cir­cu­lar 4/1998.

NA-CNP-002 11

3.15 The loc­a­tion­al and detailed require­ments for the access are well covered by the pro­posed Con­di­tion as recom­men­ded in the plan­ning officer’s hand­ling report to Com­mit­tee spe­cific­ally Con­di­tions 1 (f) and (I). The applic­ant con­curs with the plan­ning author­ity in its let­ter of 21 March 2019 that Trans­port Scotland’s pro­posed con­di­tion (b) is not neces­sary. Should the report­er wish how­ever, to include this con­di­tion (b), the applic­ant would sug­gest that the high­lighted text below be removed. This would suf­fice to ensure the detailed access arrange­ments are sub­mit­ted and approved by the plan­ning author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scotland.

b. That not­with­stand­ing the access arrange­ments shown on the Indic­at­ive Site Lay­out Plan (Draw­ing No.50277/101), the loc­a­tion of the access road and its con­nec­tion to the pub­lic road net­work shall require the pri­or writ­ten approv­al of the Plan­ning Author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. No devel­op­ment shall com­mence on site until a detailed plan show­ing the access arrange­ments have been sub­mit­ted to and approved by the Plan­ning Author­ity in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. There­after the devel­op­ment shall be imple­men­ted in accord­ance with the approved details. 3.16 Fur­ther­more, in rela­tion to the above word­ing in Trans­port Scotland’s most recent sub­mis­sion (28^th March 2019) ref­er­ence is included to the ​“con­nec­tion to the pub­lic road net­work” — this is how­ever bey­ond the applic­a­tion site bound­ary, not included with­in the pro­posed devel­op­ment. The cur­rent applic­a­tion is for a new farm access con­nec­tion to the exist­ing intern­al private Estate road net­work, from which it will con­nect to the pub­lic road net­work via the exist­ing routes, or via a future arrange­ment as included with­in Trans­port Scotland’s pro­posed A9 Dualling Scheme. 3.17 As to the mat­ter raised by Trans­port Scot­land as to the pos­sib­il­ity of a new house asso­ci­ated with the farm it is con­firmed that this is not included in the descrip­tion of the devel­op­ment and is not part of this application.

NA-CNP-002 12

CHAPTER 4: THE CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY 4.1 Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity officers and the Plan­ning Com­mit­tee were clearly aware of the poten­tial for con­flict between the pro­posed devel­op­ment on this site and the A9 Dualling Scheme in this loc­a­tion. That is why the recom­mend­a­tion to approve the applic­a­tion for plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple was con­di­tioned on fur­ther detail to be sup­plied to demon­strate align­ment with the A9 dualling pro­pos­als as well as approv­al in con­sulta­tion with Trans­port Scot­land. This approach safe­guards the deliv­ery of the A9 Dualling Scheme. 4.2 The plan­ning applic­a­tion was made for plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple, not for detailed plan­ning per­mis­sion. A grant of plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple does not guar­an­tee a right to devel­op. The right to devel­op is only achieved once requis­ite mat­ters for the detailed scheme have been approved. Even then, an approved scheme may not be implemented