543 homes at Land Between Plean And The Bannockburn Interchange, Plean

What is proposed

The application seeks 543 homes, roads, open space, sustainable drainage and associated infrastructure, including private and affordable homes of different sizes.

“Application 19/00310/FUL for the ‘Erection of residential development, village centre (Use Class 1, 2, 3, 8), formation of open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure works with, (in principle) employment land (Use Class 4, 5, 6), community campus and primary school’ was granted subject to conditions on 19 December 2023 following approval by the Planning & Regulation Panel and the completion of a Section 75 Legal Agreement.”

“This application proposes 543 homes across the three housing areas. This results in an additional 27 homes above the approved Springfield layout for these housing plots. A range of 1 to 5 bedroom units are proposed featuring apartments, terraced, semi-detached and detached private house types.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site lies within the wider development, around the village core and a proposed primary school, with existing homes and a nursery nearby.

“Considerations The Site Durieshill is located to the south of Stirling, approximately 1.5 km from the settlement of Bannockburn and 1.5 m kilometres to the north west of Plean. The application site is located within areas H, J and M of the “Original Permission’s approved plans. These areas are located centrally within Durieshill, around the village core and adjacent to one of the proposed new primary schools.”

Officer report

Earlier permission and site works

An earlier permission covered the whole development with 3,042 homes, and the current developer had begun preparatory and infrastructure works.

“[the applicant] have since acquired the whole site from Springfield and Barratt is now the lead developer at Durieshill. Barratt has commenced on site, undertaking preparatory site works, delivering the early infrastructure works required to support the delivery of the first phase of housing, with the implementation of active travel routes, land platforming and stabilisation as part of the implementation of the original planning consent, 19/00310/FUL (the “Original…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval with conditions and a Section 75 agreement regulating planning obligations, housing numbers and the wider site.

“Recommendations Planning & Regulation Panel is asked to approve the application subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in Appendix 1, but to withhold issuing the Decision Notice until a Section 75 Legal Agreement has been completed securing the planning obligations and regulating the wider site.”

“Legal & Risk Implications This report forms the Report of Handling for the planning application in compliance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013. The application is a major planning application under the terms of the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 and therefore cannot be considered under delegation.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The revised layout increased these plots from 516 to 543 homes, reduced affordable homes in them, and retained infrastructure and design principles.

“The overall number of houses included within these three areas has increased from 516 to 543. The additional 27 homes represent just over a 5% increase in numbers on these plots, over and above those housing plots granted within the same location of the Original Permission. The changes related to the increase in numbers across the three housing plots could be potentially a material change in the previous consent.”

“The revised layout proposes 135 affordable houses, 25% of 543 units including a mix of 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom house types as well as bungalow units which are suitable for wheelchair users. The final mix of affordable homes is the result of extensive consultation with Stirling Council’s Housing Team to ensure that the development provides an appropriate range of affordable housing to meet local needs and is acceptable.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Most consultees raised no objection, while roads officers supported the proposal overall but had concerns about visitor parking distribution.

“Consultations Mining Remediation Authority: Initial objection subject to the submission of further details to demonstrate that the proposed layout has been suitably informed by the presence of all recorded mineshaft entries. The developer has provided a statement from JPB Consultants along with updated layout plans which demonstrate that the built development proposals would avoid the mine entries on the site and their respective zones of influence.”

“Overall supportive of the proposals apart from the provision and distribution of the visitor parking. Several conditions recommended.”

Officer report

Views from the public

Four representations were received: one objection, one support and two neither supporting nor objecting, covering transport, safety, amenity, trees, drainage and infrastructure.

“Representations Four competent representations have been received, including 1 objection, 1 in support and 2 neither in support or objecting to the application. The material planning considerations raised in these representations are summarised below.”

“Impact on the built and natural environment and wooded areas needs to be considered along with the loss of trees. Response: The built and natural heritage is integral to the overall development of the site and there are numerous Conditions on the original consent aiming to ensure the protection and enhancement of assets as well as the addition of landscaping and biodiversity in each of the housing plots.”

Officer report

Who spoke at the hearing

The applicant presented support for the officer recommendation, while a representative for an objector presented objections; both answered members’ questions.

The vote

Councillor Benny moved the officer recommendation, Councillor Kleinman seconded it, and the Panel agreed unanimously without a roll call vote.

“Following conclusion of the Hearing process, Councillor Benny, seconded by Councillor Kleinman, moved the officer recommendations contained within the report. This was agreed unanimously without the need for a roll call vote.”

Minutes