WARNING - By their nature, text files cannot include scanned images and tables. 
The process of converting documents to text only, can cause formatting changes and 
misinterpretation of the contents can sometimes result. Wherever possible you 
should refer to the pdf version of this document.



CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 
Planning Paper 4 17 November 2006 

CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 


Title: REPORT ON CALLED-IN PLANNING APPLICATION 

Prepared by: MARY GRIER, PLANNING OFFICER 
(DEVELOPMENT CONTROL) 

DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: FULL PERMISSION FOR THE 
DEMOLITION OF STEADINGS AND THE ERECTION OF A SELF CONTAINED 
DWELLING ANNEXE. 

REFERENCE: 06/344/CP 

APPLICANT: MR. WILLIAM GRANT, ‘BEECHGROVE’, 
MAINS OF GARTEN FARM, BOAT OF GARTEN, INVERNESS-SHIRE. 

DATE CALLED-IN: 8TH SEPTEMBER 2006 

RECOMMENDATION : GRANT WITH CONDITIONS 


Fig. 1 - Map showing the location of the grounds of Beechgrove Mains of Garten.



SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSAL 

1. Full permission is sought in this application for the demolition of a 
steading and the erection of new residential accommodation on the 
footprint of the steading. The new accommodation is proposed to be 
positioned to the rear of an existing dwelling house, known as 
‘Beechgrove’ on Mains of Garten Farm, on the western side of the 
B970 approximately 2.7 kilometres outside Boat of Garten. The new 
build is intended to form a self contained dwelling annex to the main 
dwelling house, and it is proposed to be medically adapted to cater for 
the specialist needs of a family member. Although having a self 
contained layout, the design concept also includes proposals for the 
creation of a corridor linking the new build with the existing dwelling 
house, in order to allow it to function as part of the overall family home. 

2. The existing structures and the remains of former structures that are 
proposed for demolition form an L shape to the rear of the main 
dwelling house. The structures have in the past been used as stables 
and a barn. A single storey steading forms the first part of the L shape 
and is located approximately 6 metres from the nearest point of the 
rear elevation of the dwelling house. The original part of the steading is 
a stone structure, and there have been a number of later additions 
(thought by the applicant to have been added in the 1950’s), including 
one at either end of the original stone structure and also projecting from 
a central point on the structure, with the extensions generally having a 
combination of concrete blockwork and timber boarding. The roof 
covering on the structure consists of asbestos sheeting. 

Fig. 2 : Colour photo of the partial exterior view of steading 
Fig. 3 :  Colour photo showing the internal view of steading 
Fig. 4 :  Colour photo showing later additions to steading 
Fig. 5 :  Colour photo of ruins of former barn 


3. The ruins of the former barn extend northwards at right angles from the 
steading to complete the L shape of the original footprint of the 
buildings. Essentially all that remains in this area is the outer wall of 
the barn, together with evidence of the floor of the former structure. 
Timber clad stables extend along the western side of the outer wall of 
the former structure (adjacent to the laneway on the western boundary 
of the site). The L shape created by the steading and ruined barn form 
the southern and western enclosures of a garden area. 

4. The proposed new structure is designed on the same footprint as the 
existing and former buildings and is a single storey form. The floor plan 
shows a layout which includes a large kitchen / dining / social space, 
computer room, bathroom facilities and three bedrooms, one of which 
is allocated as a carer’s bedroom. The layout also incorporates a 
hydrotherapy pool, with associated plant room and shower room, and 
also includes an integrated double garage, which is proposed to be 
fitted with a wheelchair platform lift providing access to the rest of the 
structure. 

Fig. 6 : Drawing showing Eastern elevation, including link corridor between existing house and 
proposed new structure. 

Fig. 7 : Drawing of proposed courtyard view from north / gable elevation 

Fig. 8 : Drawing of proposed view from west (adjacent laneway serving holiday chalets) 

Fig. 9 :  Drawing of view from south (section shown through linking corridor to main 
dwelling house). 

5. The external finishes proposed consist of the predominant use of a wet 
dash roughcast, with stonework proposed as a basecourse and also for 
detailing purposes on parts of the northern and eastern gabled 
sections, all under a natural slate roof. The use of larch is also 
proposed for detailing purposes. The design also incorporates white 
timber windows. The projecting single storey stable section on the 
western elevation is proposed to consist of grey metal profile sheeting. 
A large decked area with views over the courtyard is proposed to 
extend from the main L shape structure and includes a ramped access 
from the courtyard / garden area. 

6. Vehicular access to the proposed new residential annex is intended to 
be provided via the existing access arrangements, with a private 
access road coming off the B970 to serve the main dwelling house 
(Beechgrove) and continuing alongside the western boundary of the 
subject site, to serve the Mains of Garten chalet development. From 
this existing route, vehicular access is proposed into the site via the 
existing gate. It is proposed to connect the development to the public 
water supply. Foul drainage proposals involve the installation of a 
BioDisc sewage treatment plant and reed bed system in a field to the 
north outside the subject site. 

7. A statement on the condition of the existing outbuilding has been 
included with the application documentation in support of the proposal 
to demolish the outbuildings and replace with a new structure. The 
outbuildings were examined by an engineer from The Structural 
Partnership, Consulting Engineers and were found to generally be in a 
very dilapidated condition. It is stated that the walls are in poor 
structural condition due to the age and exposure of the structures. The 
report also states that “mortar bedding has perished, stonework is 
spalling, saturated and cracking and several of the walls are out of 
plumb.” The structures which are the original farm outbuildings are 
described as consisting of traditional rubble masonry walls and infill 
blockwork construction with timber trusses and corrugated metal roofs. 
There is no damp proof course evident and it is also unlikely that there 
are any significant foundations or sufficient frost cover to the 
foundations. The statement concludes that the buildings are beyond 
reasonable structural repair. 

8. In addition to the statement submitted by an independent firm of 
structural engineers, a brief summary of the history of the buildings 
proposed for demolition has been provided by the applicants’ agent. 
The exact date of the original steading is unknown but it is thought to 
date from circa. 1880. Some improvements were made in 1957, 
including the existing walls raised by concrete blockwork and the 
development of a new timber roof with asbestos content sheeting. 
Extensions were also erected for the purposes of creating calf pens 
and a storage shed. In 1967 a new lean-to was added to the western 
side of the northern barn area, with the lean-to still in use today as 
stables and pen. In 1991 while the barn area was in use for livestock it 
suffered badly from winter weather, with heavy snow resulting in the 
collapse of the roof. The loss of the roof exacerbated the rate of 
deterioration of the barn, with the result that it became necessary for 
health and safety reasons to demolish half the walls of the structure. In 
an appraisal of the current state of the structures on the site, the 
architect for the project sets out his view that “what’s left of both 
buildings cannot be described as having any architectural merit or 
cultural heritage value.” The relatively intact steading is a mixture of 
the original random rubble walls, blockwork, and timber additions 
added over the years. It is stated that there is no quality stone or slate 
worthy of retention and the project architect expresses concern in his 
letter about the level of damp in the walls, particularly during the winter 
months when ice has been known to form inside the roofed steading. 

9. The application documentation includes a letter of support from a 
doctor at Grantown-on-Spey Medical Practice, outlining the background 
to the need for the proposed structure. Reference is made to the 
medical condition of the applicant’s daughter and the fact that the 
condition necessitates her use of a wheelchair. The purpose built 
facility is designed on a single level to facilitate use by a wheelchair 
user and it is intended to improve the safety of the applicant’s daughter 
(by lessening the likelihood of falls due to changes in ground levels 
etc.) as well as assisting in developing her skills of independent living. 
Hydrotherapy has also been recommended as part of her medical 
treatment and for this reason a hydrotherapy pool has been included 
within the layout. 

10. Various options were considered by the applicants and their architect 
prior to submitting an application for the proposed new building. 
Consideration was given to the use of an adjacent dwelling house 
which is in the ownership of the applicants. It was determined that the 
accommodation required could not be developed within the existing 
one and a half storey dwelling house and the constraints of the small 
site associated with the property precluded consideration of extensions 
of a sufficient size. In addition, the property is occupied by a long term 
tenant who works locally and whose children attend the local school 
and the eviction of that family from the property was not considered by 
the applicants to be appropriate. 

11. Supporting documentation from the applicants’ agent / architect makes 
reference to the planning policy generally applicable in the area and 
states that the proposal “is an exception as it is clearly a related family 
matter in particular and can also be justified re. management of land 
and occupation reasons.” The submission also stresses that the 
proposal is considered an extension and not a new house. The 
applicant has also confirmed that he is willing to enter into a Section 75 
agreement restricting the occupancy of the proposed structure and / or 
restricting the use of the proposed structure to ancillary 
accommodation to the main dwelling house, if required to do so. 


DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONTEXT 

National Policy 

12. At national level, Scottish Planning Policy 3 (Planning for Housing) 
(February 2003) considers design in new housing developments to be 
an important issue when planning for housing development in both 
urban and rural areas. Planning Advice Note 44 (Fitting New 
Housing Development into the Landscape) (March 1994) states that 
“In seeking to protect and enhance the quality of the environment, 
developers should aim for a high standard of design and landscaping in 
new housing development.” Particular emphasis is given to the shape, 
layout and form of the development and its impact on the surrounding 
area; the choice of materials, with colours and textures that 
complement development in the locality; well designed schemes that 
respect both the local environment and the landscape setting; and the 
visual impact of new developments as seen from major roads and rail 
routes. 

13. Planning Advice Note 67 (Housing Quality) (February 2003) 
emphasises the essential role that the planning process can play in 
ensuring that the design of new housing reflects a full understanding of 
its context in terms of both its physical location and market conditions; 
the design of new housing reinforces local and Scottish identity; and 
new housing is integrated into the movement and settlement patterns 
of the wider area. It refers in the main to more urban housing 
developments but it nonetheless emphasises the importance of general 
issues such as landscape and visual impact, topography, building 
height, relationship with adjacent development, and views into and out 
of a site. Planning Advice Note 72 is the new advice from central 
government on Housing in the Countryside, (February 2005) and on 
design it states “High quality design must be integral to new 
development and local area differences must be respected”. 
Furthermore it states “In some areas, such as National Parks, National 
Scenic Areas and Conservation Areas, there may be a case for more 
prescription and a preference for traditional design, but it is also 
important to encourage the best of contemporary designs. There is 
considerable scope for creative and innovative solutions whilst relating 
a new home to the established character of the area. The overall aim 
should be to ensure that new housing is carefully located, worthy of its 
setting, and is the result of an imaginative, responsive and sensitive 
design process.” In its concluding remarks, it states “Every settlement 
should have its own distinctive identity. This is determined in part by 
the local characteristics of the area's architectural style of individual 
buildings and the relationship of these buildings to each other.” 

Highland Structure Plan 2001 

14. Policy H3 of the Structure Plan states that housing will generally be 
within existing and planned new settlements. New housing will not be 
permitted unless it can be demonstrated that it is required for the 
management of land and related family purposes. Policy L4 
Landscape Character, states that the Council will in the consideration 
of development proposals have regard to the desirability of maintaining 
and enhancing present landscape character. Policy G2 Design for 
Sustainability, lists a number of criteria on which proposed 
developments will be assessed. These include service provision (water 
and sewerage, drainage, roads, schools, electricity); accessibility by 
public transport, cycling, walking and car; energy efficiency in terms of 
location, layout and design (including the utilisation of renewable 
energy sources) and impacts on resources such as habitats, species, 
landscape, cultural heritage and scenery. 

Badenoch and Strathspey Local Plan (1997) 

15. The Landward ‘Housing in the Countryside’ strategy identifies the land 
in question as a Restricted Countryside Area. Accordingly, section 
2.1.2.3 of the Plan reconfirms the sentiments of the Structure Plan 
policy stating that a “strong presumption will be maintained against the 
development of houses” in such areas. Exceptions will only be made 
where a “house is essential for the management of land, related family 
and occupational reasons.” It further stresses that adherence to the 
principles of good siting and design will be required. 

16. For information purposes only : The Consultation Draft of the 
Cairngorms National Park Local Plan includes the proposed site 
within an area identified as General Policy 1. The proposed policy 
states that “development will be permitted if it is unlikely to have a 
significant adverse effect on the aims of the National Park or any of its 
special qualities. Where it is concluded that there would be adverse 
effects on the aims of the National Park, any of its special qualities, or 
public health or amenity from a development, it will only be permitted 
where it is outweighed by social and economic benefits of national 
importance or of importance to the aims of the National Park and where 
appropriate measures are taken to minimise and mitigate the adverse 
effects of the development.” 

17. The draft Local Plan includes a policy entitled New Housing Outwith 
Defined Settlements, and section 3.103 states that “outwith 
settlements, but adjacent to existing building groups, housing for local 
residents / workers may be permissable.” Section 3.104 expands on 
this defining an ‘existing building group’ as 3 or more residential 
properties. The ‘pattern’ of existing development refers to the density 
and spacing of the group. 


CONSULTATIONS 

18. The Area Roads and Community Works section of Highland Council 
has assessed the proposal and has no objection. The consultation 
response recommends in the event of consideration being given to the 
granting of planning permission that it be conditional upon the applicant 
entering into a Section 75 legal agreement linking by title the dwelling 
annexe to the existing dwelling house. The recommendation is made 
in order to limit the number of properties in different ownership served 
by the existing access roads and in order to reduce the potential for 
disputes arising regarding future maintenance of such roads. 

19. In a consultation response from SEPA it is acknowledged that 
proposals for foul drainage are to be dealt with via a biodisc treatment 
plant and reed bed system, with the plant located in the field to the 
north of the proposed development site. The response also notes that 
the water management proposals for the swimming pool include the 
provision of a holding tank, capable of holding the volume of water 
contained within the swimming pool, and that the tank would be vented 
to allow the chlorine to dissipate. The response from SEPA concludes 
that the proposals are acceptable, provided that the drainage system 
soakaways are constructed in accordance with Building Regulations, 
following the carrying out of percolation tests to demonstrate the 
suitability of the ground in the proposed location, and maintaining 
appropriate distances from ground and surface waters, all to the 
satisfaction of the Planning Authority. 

20. Scottish Water has not raised any objection to the proposal and 
advise that the Blackpark Water Treatment Works currently has 
sufficient capacity to service the development. However, the response 
also advises that any granting of approval by the Planning Authority 
does not guarantee a connection to Scottish Water infrastructure until a 
satisfactory solution is identified. The response from Scottish Water 
also advises that there are no known sewers in the vicinity of the 
proposed development and accordingly advise that any septic tank 
should be sited in such a manner as to allow easy access for emptying 
by tanker. 

21. In a response from the Archaeology Section of Highland Council it is 
noted that the proposal will affect at least one building that is depicted 
on the first edition Ordnance Survey map of c. 1870. Consequently it is 
recommended that major alterations should not be carried out without a 
visual record first being made. In order to protect the historic interest of 
the site it is recommended in the event of the granting of planning 
permission that a condition is included requiring no site clearance 
works shall be undertaken until a comprehensive photographic record 
of the remains of the old buildings or the other features affected by the 
proposed development has been compiled and lodged with the 
Planning Authority. 

22. Further information on the history and usage of the structures on the 
site was sought in the initial response from Highland Council’s 
Contaminated Land Unit. Further to receipt of the information a 
second response was received from that unit, in which it was 
recommended that all asbestos contained within the building fabric be 
removed by an appropriately licensed contractor to a waste facility 
licensed to accept asbestos waste. 

23. Boat of Garten and Vicinity Community Council discussed the 
proposal at their September meeting and subsequently prepared a 
submission stating that there is no objection to the development 
proposal and that the Community Council “regard this project as an 
excellent use of derelict buildings.” Following the October meeting of 
the Community Council, a further submission was made on the 
proposal, emphasising the desire of the Community Council to “have 
consideration given to the social aspect of this application” stating that 
it will be built as a facility for a member of a family with a disability.” 


REPRESENTATIONS 

24. One letter of representation has been received from RSPB Scotland, 
which rather than being a letter of objection simply sought clarification 
on proposals for servicing the development. Reference was made in 
the letter to the fact that RSPB currently own three chalets at Mains of 
Garten, all of which share septic tank infrastructure with three of the 
applicants existing properties.1 Reference was made to there 
historically being difficulties experienced with the existing sewage 
system backing up, despite the tank being regularly emptied. The letter 
of representation therefore raises the issue of whether or not there is 
capacity within the system to accommodate the proposed development 
and seeks clarification as to what sewerage system is proposed for the 
development. 

1 The properties referred to are understood to be three of the group of chalets to the west of the subject 
site, which are used for the provision of short term holiday accommodation. 

Fig. 10 : Colour photo showing the view of some of the chalets adjacent to the western boundary of the 
subject site. 

25. Further to the submission of detailed information on the servicing 
arrangements for the proposed development a representative of RSPB 
indicated in a telephone call to the CNPA that such proposals are 
acceptable and address the concerns raised in the letter of 
representation. 


APPRAISAL 

26. The proposed development is located within an area identified in the 
Badenoch and Strathspey Local Plan as Restricted Countryside, and 
as detailed earlier there is a strong presumption against the 
development of houses in such areas, with exceptions only being made 
where a house is essential for land management, related family and 
occupational reasons. The key issue to assess in this application is the 
nature of the development, and in particular whether or not it warrants 
assessment as a conventional dwelling house or as a self contained 
annex to the main dwelling house on the subject site. The assessment 
will also reflect on other issues such as general design, siting, visual 
impact, amenity, road access and servicing provision. 

Fig. 11 :  Colour photo of 'Beechgrove’, Mains of Garten as viewed from the B970. The new 
structure is proposed to be positioned to the rear of the existing property. 

27. The proposed structure is a substantial size and scale, more commonly 
associated with a dwelling house than an extension. However, 
although being of a size and having a layout which would allow it to 
function as a self contained residential unit, a linking corridor is 
provided to the main dwelling house. In addition the description of the 
proposed development as detailed on the planning application form 
refers to “new accommodation to form a medical adaption extension to 
existing dwelling.” Whilst planning policy guidelines, such as those 
expressed in Highland Council’s Development Plan Policy 
Guidelines (April 2003) dictate that the “personal preferences or 
financial circumstances of any individuals involved are not material 
planning matters” I feel that it is necessary in this particular case to 
acknowledge the personal circumstances giving rise to this application. 
As detailed in earlier paragraphs of this report, the principle reason for 
the proposed new structure is to provide a purpose built facility to 
comfortably and safely accommodate the medical needs of a family 
member. It is clear from the layout of the proposed new building (which 
incorporates carer’s accommodation, a hydrotherapy pool and a 
wheelchair lift from the proposed integrated garage) and from the 
design which includes a wide corridor link to the main family home, that 
the proposal is genuinely required as ancillary accommodation to the 
main dwelling house. In addition the applicant has agreed to enter into 
a Section 75 Agreement restricting the use of the new build element to 
ancillary accommodation. In accepting the proposed development as 
an extension or as ancillary accommodation to the main dwelling 
house, it does not offend planning policies on residential development 
applicable to this area. 

28. Given that an extension to a dwelling house is generally acceptable, it 
is then necessary to assess the design of the new building. The 
proposal involves the demolition of a steading and justification for this 
has been advanced in supporting documentation (please refer to 
paragraphs 7 – 11 of this report), including details from an independent 
engineer of the deteriorating structural condition of the remaining 
element of the original steading and barn, as well as the practicalities of 
internal layout requirements resulting from the medical needs of the 
end user which necessitates a level layout, spacious rooms to facilitate 
wheelchair use, and also the incorporation of a hydrotherapy pool, as 
recommended by medical experts. Aside from the issue of the 
structural instability of the existing stone building, the required layouts 
and spaces could not be achieved within the constraints of the existing 
steading. Indeed efforts to achieve this would more than likely result in 
the destruction of many of the original characteristics of the existing 
building. It is therefore understandable and I believe entirely justifiable, 
to propose the demolition of the remaining structure and replacement 
with a new purpose built structure. 

29. Considerable efforts have been made in the design approach to 
respect the form of the original buildings on the site, with the proposed 
development forming an L shape following the original footprint. Ridge 
heights vary between 5 metres and 8 metres across the different 
elements of the building. However, the design generally creates the 
impression of a low level building and efforts have been made to 
incorporate natural stone work in several places which attempts to 
echo the stone finish of the buildings which it is to replace. Windows 
opening throughout the building also have a traditional vertical 
emphasis. Within a National Park, I feel it is entirely appropriate to 
advocate innovative approaches to building design, in suitable 
locations, and where it will result in a building of lasting quality. In 
supporting this proposal, it is worth noting some of the text of SPP15 
(Planning for Rural Development (February 2005)). Paragraph 23 
states that “opportunities to replace run down housing and steadings 
with designs using new materials should also be embraced. Planning 
Authorities should not unreasonably constrain such modernisation and 
steading conversion within the original footprint or height limit unless 
there are compelling design or conservation reasons for doing so. 
They should adopt a supportive approach and ensure that new 
development fits in the landscape. There is an unmet demand for plots 
on which unique, individually designed houses can be built in rural 
locations.” 

30. In addition to the proposed new structure being sited in accordance 
with the L shape footprint of the original building, its location is also to 
the rear of ‘Beechgrove’, the main dwelling house, in an unobtrusive 
position. The structure will be set amidst a collection of buildings, 
including the aforementioned main dwelling house to the south east, a 
further residential property immediately to the east of the proposed new 
structure, a collection of mobile homes to the north east, open land 
immediately to the north and the Mains of Garten holiday chalets to the 
west of the proposed building. In the context of such a grouping of 
structures I do not consider that the proposed new building will be an 
obtrusive feature or have any negative visual impact at the proposed 
location. On the contrary, the new structure could be considered an 
enhancement of the area in which it is proposed, which at present 
includes deteriorating buildings and appears to be an underutilised and 
somewhat poorly maintained outdoor space. 

31. Where window openings in the new structure overlook the existing 
properties, there is adequate separation distance to ensure that the 
residential amenity of such properties is not unduly affected. The 
number of windows in the western elevation (facing the holiday 
cottages) is limited, with the majority of window openings contained 
within the southern elevation (in closest proximity to the existing family 
dwelling house) and in the eastern elevation overlooking the proposed 
timber deck and garden area which is enclosed on two sides by the 
footprint of the building. In addition, an existing belt of mature 
coniferous trees forms a prominent feature along much of the north 
eastern boundary and would provide an effective screen between the 
proposed structure and the mobile homes / caravan park on 
neighbouring land. 

Fig. 12 : Colour photo showing the extent of existing vegetation 
Fig. 13 :  Colour photo of the ruins of buildings and garden 
along the north western boundary. ground. 

32. Finally in terms of infrastructure and general servicing, the proposed 
residential annex would not add any further pressures to access or 
drainage and water requirements. The structure would be utilised by 
family members already in residence in the main dwelling house, and 
would be accessed via the same driveway. It would also be serviced 
by its own independent sewage treatment plant and would not 
therefore have any impact on sewerage arrangements for surrounding 
properties. 


IMPLICATIONS FOR THE AIMS OF THE NATIONAL PARK 

Conserve and Enhance the Natural and Cultural Heritage of the Area 

33. The outbuildings which would be lost as a result of the proposed 
development are in a deteriorating condition and the original character 
of the relatively intact stone built structure has already been 
significantly compromised by way of several additions in the 1950’s. 
The structures on the site are not therefore considered to be of strong 
cultural heritage value. 

Promote Sustainable Use of Natural Resources 

34. No details have been provided on the sourcing of materials used in the 
proposed new building. There is however a possibility that stone from 
the remaining steading on the site could be re-used in the new design, 
which incorporates significant amounts of stonework. 

Promote Understanding and Enjoyment of the Area 

35. The proposal is not of particular relevance to this aim, although a 
quality building on the site in place of the deteriorating outbuildings 
could be considered to offer some aesthetic improvement benefits for 
visitors staying at the adjacent Mains of Garten chalets, which overlook 
the subject site. 

Promote Sustainable Economic and Social Development of the Area 

36. The proposal does not make any particular contribution to this aim. 


RECOMMENDATION 

That Members of the Committee support a recommendation to: 

Grant full planning permission for the demolition of steadings and 
erection of a self contained dwelling annexe at Mains of Garten Farm, 
Boat of Garten, subject to the completion of a S75 Agreement to restrict 
the use of the proposed annexe to accommodation ancillary to the main 
dwelling house and restricting the sale of the annexe separate from the 
main dwelling house; and subject to the following conditions : - 

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun within 
five years from the date of this permission. 

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning 
(General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, no additional 
house extension shall be formed, and no greenhouse, shed, garage or 
other structure shall be erected without the prior written consent of the 
Planning Authority. 

3. Prior to the commencement of development, a landscaping plan which 
shall include (i) proposals for the planting of indigenous trees and 
shrubs within and on the boundaries of the site and (ii) details of all 
other types of new boundary treatments proposed, shall be submitted 
for the agreement and written approval of the CNPA acting as Planning 
Authority. All approved landscaping shall be : 

(a) Completed during the planting season next following the completion 
of the development, or such other date as may be agreed in writing 
with the CNPA acting as Planning Authority; 

(b) maintained in perpetuity in accordance with the detailed 
maintenance schedule/table. Any trees or shrubs removed, or 
which in the opinion of the CNPA acting as Planning Authority, are 
dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased 
within three years of planting, shall be replaced by trees or shrubs 
of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. 

4. All public services for the development including electrical, communal 
television and telephone cables, shall be undergrounded throughout 
the site. 

5. Prior to the commencement of development, a photographic record 
shall be made of the remains of old buildings and / or other features 
affected by the proposed development, in accordance with the attached 
specification, and shall thereafter be submitted for the agreement of the 
CNPA acting as Planning Authority, in consultation with Highland 
Council’s Archaeology Section. No clearance work shall take place 
until confirmation in writing has been received from the CNPA acting as 
Planning Authority that the record made has been lodged and is 
satisfactory. 

6. All windows and external doors shall be timber. 

7. Prior to the commencement of the wall rendering works, a sample 
panel, approximately 1 metre square, of the wet dash roughcast finish 
shall be prepared on site for the inspection and further written approval 
of the CNPA acting as Planning Authority. 

8. The proposed stone finish, shall consist of natural stone only, with 
stone from the demolished steading being utilised wherever possible. 
Prior to the commencement of development, details of the stonework 
shall be submitted for the agreement and written approval of the CNPA 
acting as Planning Authority. 

9. All asbestos contained within the building fabric shall be removed by an 
appropriately licensed contractor to a waste facility licensed to accept 
asbestos waste. Prior to the completion of the development and before 
the building is occupied for residential use, a copy of the Waste 
Transfer Notice recording that this has occurred shall be submitted for 
the written agreement of the CNPA acting as Planning Authority. 

Advice note : 

• Scottish Water has not objected to the proposed development, but 
nonetheless advise that any planning approval granted by the 
Planning Authority does not guarantee a connection to Scottish Water 
infrastructure until a satisfactory solution is identified. It will be 
necessary for the developer to ensure that the development will not 
have any detrimental impact on the water services that Scottish Water 
currently provide to existing customers. Scottish Water advise that the 
developer will be required, as part of any network upgrading work, to 
provide a solution that would prevent or mitigate any further impact. 

• In accordance with the requirements of SEPA, pool water may be 
discharged to a separate soakaway, provided that : 

- the chloride concentration is maintained at no more than 1.5 
parts per mission; 

- the regular discharge to backwash the filtration system and any 
discharge from emptying of the pool is de-chlorinated prior to 
discharge to ground by being allowed to stand in a container 
vented to the atmosphere for at least 3 days; 

- the total volume discharged does not exceed 6m3 per 3 days; 

- the contained water is tested to confirm that it is chlorine free 
prior to discharge to ground; 

- a ground water and percolation test is carried out in order to 
identify the suitability of the site of the proposed soakaway; 

- the soakaway is constructed in accordance with BS6297, and 
is located at least 50 metres away from any well and 10 metres 
away from any field drain, ditch or watercourse. 


Mary Grier 

planning@cairngorms.co.uk 

10 November 2006 

The map on the first page of this report has been produced to aid in the statutory process of dealing with planning 
applications. The map is to help identify the site and its surroundings and to aid Planning Officers, Committee 
Members and the Public in the determination of the proposal. Maps shown in the Planning Committee Report can 
only be used for the purposes of the Planning Committee. Any other use risks infringing Crown Copyright and may 
lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Maps produced within this Planning Committee Report can only be 
reproduced with the express permission of the Cairngorms National Park Authority and other Copyright holders. This 
permission must be granted in advance.