Deveron’s Sandown appeal rejected by Scottish Government
The Gurn breaks the news that the Scottish Government has rejected Deveron’s appeal against their application for development at Sandown.
The appeal document is rather long but absolutely condemns Deveron’s attempt at willful over development, which is clearly identifies.
Additionally, unlike Mark Cumming’s press claims that the Highland Council was working against developer interests in the A96 corridor, the appeal document makes it clear that the HC had set clear rules boundaries on how development should proceed, and that Deveron had flouted these repeatedly.
The document is long, but the conclusion makes for good reading on the key points, as below:
Conclusions
132. We appreciate that it is frustrating for Deveron to face refusal having conducted negotiations with council officers and other interested parties extending over some 17 months, and culminating in a favourable recommendation to the relevant council committee. Nevertheless, we conclude that the council is entitled to take the view that, as Mr Pollock expressed it “The proposed development constitutes overdevelopment of the site, adopting high densities and an urban form that is inappropriate for the location and inconsistent with
the character of Nairn.”133. In that respect, Councillor Park expressed concern that local people should be able to have confidence in the council’s plans for development of the area. The council’s vision for Sandown, as articulated by Councillor Park at the inquiry, has, in broad terms, been consistently expressed through the local plan and a series of non-statutory council documents over the last 10 years or so. It looks for lower rise development in clusters, a more generous landscape/treed framework, and a prestigious office development: all amounting to an attractive and sympathetic gateway to the town. It is evident that the council are open to design ideas which would create more of a sense of place and a pedestrian-friendly layout.
134. The proposal for Sandown would represent a significant degree of change from the direction indicated by the council’s statutory and non-statutory policy documents. Moreover, those documents have already reflected changing circumstances (for example the A96 Framework includes higher density housing in Nairn, but not at Sandown).
135. We consider that the council’s stance is fully justified by that policy background, and we see no basis for imposing a supposed government standard, as urged by the appellants.
136. We therefore find that:
• the proposal does not comply with the development plan;
• the extent to which the plan has become out of date requires greater weight to be placed on other material considerations;
• whilst those considerations justify more housing than the development plan indicates, the scale of development applied for would be excessive for this prominent location and would constitute overdevelopment;
• the likely effect on the character and appearance of the area of the density of development, building heights, reduced structural landscaping, etc as illustrated in the masterplan would be adverse;
• the proposal departs significantly from the visions for Sandown expressed in the Draft Sandown Development Brief, the A96 Growth Corridor Framework, and the Highland Wide Local Development Plan Main Issues Report;
• there is no basis for imposing a supposed government standard deriving from national policy; and
• whilst various aspects of the scheme would be advantageous for the area, including the potential for early provision of housing, and especially affordable housing, they do not outweigh the shortcomings identified above.
However, for the avoidance of doubt, we are satisfied that:
• there would be no adverse effect on the free flow of traffic on the A96(T) road;
and
• the proposal should not be rejected for reasons relating to town centre infrastructure, rat running, education, health, or other factors raised by objectors.
Perhaps it’s time for Deveron to reconsider their application and modify it so that it is very much in character with the original planning arrangements, instead of the massive urbanisation they tried to force on us.
Certainly intelligent development works for the town, and it is clear that there existing official guides that must be followed on how to achieve this.
Trying to flaunt these, and then hiring a PR company to steamroller objections, has been proven to be an absolutely stupid business strategy.
Comments
3 Responses to “Deveron’s Sandown appeal rejected by Scottish Government”
Leave a Reply
Visited 1419 times, 1 so far today
Good result, Well done all the volunteers who worked so hard to fight this application.
I find this bit hard to take however
‘there would be no adverse effect on the free flow of traffic on the A96(T) road;’
loooooooool!
When I was giving evidence and listening carefully to the questioning of witnesses and to the views of other parties several things occurred to me, one of which was maybe community councils and other groups could coordinate a meeting at which an ‘expert’ could focus purely on transport impact assessments and transport surveys (similar meetings could be held for those interested in environmental reports, socio-economic reports, retails impact assessments etc) Then, responding to the reports that accompany major planning applications would maybe not seem so daunting. One of the planning contacts I have focuses on retail and she is a great advocate of communities doing their own surveys. Pictures speak louder than words and maybe short films too. This will become paricularly important now that there is no automatic right to be heard and the appointed Reporter will decide how to investigate an appeal – written submission only; site visit, hearing, partial Inquiry.
Just a thought, build on experience? keep moving forward? Many more applications likely to come forward.
Good points Cathy. If building 550 houses on the edge of town would not have an ‘adverse effect on the free flow of traffic’ then just what would? 5,500 perhaps?
I suppose one is left in the hands of the Reporters to interpret the data from the experts. Just what do they mean by free flow of traffic, would being down to 5 m.p.h through Nairn with frequent stops still be ‘free flow of traffic’?