Central Planning Committee

direction. In addition it is considered that the traffic generated by 4 dwelling would besignificantly less that that generated by 7 dwellings and in the context of the existing trafficmovements at this locale, the amount of traffic that would be generated is not considered to besignificant. Furthermore it is considered that proposed road improvements works would benefitother existing residents in the vicinity of the site.2.6.6 The Reporter also stated that the previous scheme did not provide for safe cycle orpedestrian access, including to school. The local primary school (Balcurvie) is situated to thesouth of the site. The proposed new footpath would link into the existing footpath network to thewest of the site and would allow for safe pedestrian access to the primary school. The site iswithin the catchment area for Kirkland High School which is not situated within reasonablewalking distance and therefore pedestrian access to the high school is not considered to be anissue this instance. However the site for the replacement high school is less than 2 miles fromthe site, however the proposed new footpath would links into the existing footpath/road networkwould offer similar pedestrian access to the replacement high school as exists for otherproperties within the vicinity.2.6.7 On balance, given the above, it is considered that the current amended scheme hasaddressed Members and the Reporters reasons for refusing the previous scheme and wouldensure that the proposed scheme would not have any significant adverse impact in terms ofroad safety and accessibility issues. Subject to a number of conditions including ones relating torelating to visibility splays, road improvement works and car parking provision it is consideredthat the proposed works comply with the Development Plan and national guidance in respect ofroad safety issues.2.7 Education2.7.1 Fife Structure Plan (2009) (2006-2026) policies SS1 and DC1 require the identification ofsites for development to take account of the existence or anticipated availability of communityinfrastructure including school provision. Policy D1 of the Adopted Local Plan also allows forfinancial contributions to be sought where there is an impact on education infrastructure.2.7.2 Education Services have been consulted and have stated that as the proposed scheme isfor less than 10 houses and as there is existing capacity within the local primary and secondaryschools an education contribution would not be required in this instance.2.8 Bats/Natural Heritage2.8.1 SPP (Landscape and Natural Heritage) advises that planning permission must not begranted for development that would be likely to have an adverse effect on a European protectedspecies. Policy E21 of the Adopted Local Plan advises that where a proposed development islikely to affect European protected species the developer must submit a survey of the status ofthat species at the site. Furthermore, it states that this survey will be required before planningpermission can be granted. Policy E23 of the Adopted Local Plan seeks to protect biodiversitytherefore developers are required to submit appraisals of any habitat or species likely to beaffected by the development.2.8.2 The bat survey submitted by the applicant was the same report that was carried over 18months ago for the previous scheme. That report found no evidence of bats but identified thatthe roof of the existing cottage had a medium to high potential value to bats as roosting habitat.Given the age of the report the applicant was asked to submit a new updated report. Theapplicant has since amended the proposed works to the cottage, omitting the works to the roofof the existing cottage. As such it is not considered the revised scheme would have any adverse23