Question 1

How far along in the process are you?

Accepted Answer

The Trust has appointed a consultant team to carry out a Stage 1 feasibility study only. This stage is intended to explore whether there is any viable, environmentally acceptable and genuinely community-supported way forward.

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) outlines seven stages of construction
projects in the UK.
 
No decision has been taken to proceed with development, no planning application has been submitted, and no preferred final proposal has been agreed.
Progression beyond feasibility stage would only take place if:
•	there is clear evidence of broad community support;
•	there is a credible business case;
•	planning, environmental and infrastructure concerns can realistically be addressed; and
•	future funding and delivery partnerships are available.
If the evidence and community response demonstrate that there is not sufficient support or viability, the proposal will not proceed further.

Question 2

Why is this happening and what evidence is there that affordable homes are needed locally?

Accepted Answer

The Trust’s work on affordable housing arose following extensive community consultation over several years.
Affordable housing has consistently been identified as one of the PH8 community’s highest priorities through multiple formal engagement processes, including:
•	the 2022 Community Action Plan consultation;
•	the establishment of the Housing Action Group in 2022;
•	the 2022 Housing Needs Survey carried out by Communities Housing Trust; and
•	the 2025 Local Place Plan consultation.
The Housing Needs Survey was an evidence-gathering exercise intended to understand the level and type of housing need within the community.
The survey:
•	received 114 responses from permanent residents;
•	identified demand for affordable homes to rent and buy locally;
•	highlighted concerns around second homes and short-term lets;
•	identified demand for downsizing options, sheltered housing and self-build plots; and
•	demonstrated strong support for prioritising housing allocation to people with a local connection.
The current feasibility study is intended to explore whether there is any realistic and community-supported opportunity to help address these locally identified needs.

Question 3

Why is Perth & Kinross Council considering this site for housing if SEPA maps show flood risk?

Accepted Answer

The flood modelling referred to during consultation was commissioned by Perth & Kinross Council as part of the Dunkeld Flood Protection Study and was undertaken by AECOM in 2022.
This work used more detailed local survey and hydraulic data than is available through national SEPA flood mapping.
SEPA flood maps provide a useful national overview; however, SEPA notes that the maps:
“give no guarantees to the accuracy, availability, security or completeness of the Flood Maps or their fitness for any purpose.”
The AECOM study included allowances for future climate change impacts, uses methodology and flows in the modelling that were agreed with SEPA and indicates that a sizeable portion of the site lies outwith areas identified as being at high flood risk from the River Tay.
Any future planning application would still require:
•	a detailed site-specific Flood Risk Assessment;
•	drainage and engineering investigations; and
•	demonstration that flood risk would not increase elsewhere.

Question 4

What about surface water flooding and standing water on the field?

Accepted Answer

As part of the feasibility study, engineers have been commissioned to help aid in the investigation of drainage and surface water issues.
Using SEPA flood maps, geological information and photographs provided by residents, engineers have advised that:
•	some ponding shown on flood maps may relate to heavy clay subsoils or a high/perched water table;
•	British Geological Survey information suggests much of the site geology consists of sands and alluvium, which generally drain relatively well; and
•	further investigation would be required as part of any future flood risk assessment.
The Trust fully recognises the concerns raised by residents regarding standing water and changing climate conditions.
Any future proposal would need to demonstrate through detailed engineering and drainage design that:
•	surface water could be appropriately managed; and
•	flood risk would not be increased elsewhere.
Local observations, photographs and resident experience remain valuable in informing this work.

Question 5

How could the A9 dualling project affect Birnam Park?

Accepted Answer

As part of the feasibility study, the consultant team has been in dialogue with Transport Scotland regarding the A9 dualling project.
The Trust understands that procurement for the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section is anticipated to begin in 2028 with completion potentially around 2033.
Transport Scotland’s proposals include land identified for drainage and infrastructure works associated with the dualling project which are subject to compulsory purchase orders.
Potential access arrangements to Birnam Park would require further investigation and assessment, particularly regarding:
•	compatibility with A9 infrastructure proposals 
•	flood risk;
•	road safety; and
•	impacts on neighbouring residents.
The Perth Road access option has been identified as one possible route requiring further technical assessment.

Question 6

How were possible development sites assessed and why is Birnam Park being explored?

Accepted Answer

The Housing Action Group initially considered 38 potential sites within Dunkeld and Birnam and Perth & Kinross Council assessed and ranked these sites using a traffic-light system to indicate development potential.
Many sites were discounted due to:
•	flooding constraints;
•	ownership issues;
•	access difficulties;
•	environmental or historic designations; and
•	infrastructure constraints.
The initial assessment of sites by PKC designated Birnam Park as unsuitable due to flood risk and designed landscape designation. More recently Birnam Park has emerged as a site considered worthy of further feasibility investigation because of:
•	updated flood modelling work;
•	its location close to local services;
•	proximity to the existing riverside core path network;
•	alignment with “20-minute neighbourhood” principles within National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4); and
•	previous comments made by the Planning Reporter suggesting that a lower-density form of development may potentially be acceptable.
The site is being considered through the Local Development Plan 3 (LDP3) process which involves formal public consultation stages led by Perth & Kinross Council.
Engaging in feasibility work before formal LDP allocation is not unusual and does not predetermine any planning outcome.

Question 7

Didn’t the Local Place Plan support retention of existing settlement boundaries?

Accepted Answer

The Local Place Plan identified several major community priorities, including:
1.	Traffic and parking concerns;
2.	Affordable housing and 
3.	Protection of community character and infrastructure capacity.
The Trust recognises that these priorities can sometimes be in tension with one another.
Many residents supported more affordable housing while also expressing concern about large-scale development outside existing settlement boundaries.
The Trust’s responsibility as a community organisation is therefore to examine whether any proposal can:
•	realistically and sustainably address housing need; while also
•	respecting community concerns regarding landscape, infrastructure and amenity.
The current work is intended to explore whether that balance can be achieved.

Question 8

Previous planning applications on this site were refused. What makes this different?

Accepted Answer

The Trust is aware of the planning history associated with Birnam Park and previous refusals.
However, the current feasibility work is taking place against a backdrop of:
•	changing national planning policy;
•	updated flood modelling work undertaken for Perth & Kinross Council in 2022;
•	National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4);
•	the ongoing Local Development Plan 3 process; and
•	previous Planning Reporter comments suggesting a lower-density proposal may potentially be acceptable on this site.
Perth & Kinross Council has also noted that current planning guidance is generally more supportive of small-scale affordable housing proposals where they align with local housing need and planning policy.
None of this guarantees planning permission would ever be granted. The feasibility study is intended to determine whether any realistic and acceptable proposal exists.

Question 9

Can the community vote on the proposal?

Accepted Answer

No formal decision has been taken regarding any future voting mechanism.
The Board’s position is that no mandate currently exists for any specific development proposal.
Progression beyond feasibility stage would require clear evidence of broad community support informed by:
•	public consultation;
•	community feedback;
•	technical assessments;
•	planning and environmental considerations; and
•	the Trust’s charitable purposes.
The feasibility study is intended to provide the information necessary for the community to make an informed judgement regarding whether any proposal should proceed.

Question 10

Why not redevelop vacant buildings or alternative sites instead?

Accepted Answer

The feasibility study at Birnam Park does not rule out future consideration of other sites or buildings.
The Housing Action Group explored a broad range of locations, many of which were discounted because of:
•	flooding constraints;
•	ownership issues;
•	access difficulties;
•	environmental designations; or
•	planning limitations.
Jubilee Park, for example, was assessed by Perth & Kinross Council as constrained because of:
•	access issues;
•	flood risk; and
•	protected greenspace/open space designation. 
The Trust recognises that some residents believe alternative sites may be more appropriate and these views remain part of the ongoing discussion.
If the current feasibility work concludes that there is not sufficient community support for Birnam Park, then other options may be considered in future.

Question 11

What scale of development is being considered?

Accepted Answer

Current feasibility work is exploring the possibility of approximately 10 homes, although no preferred option has been agreed.
The wider site could potentially include:
•	substantial open green space;
•	community growing areas;
•	biodiversity enhancement;
•	woodland or habitat creation; 
•	active travel links connected to the riverside core path; and
•	outdoor nursery facility
The scale and mix of any non-housing uses would be informed by community feedback.

Question 12

What would the non-housing use on the site be?

Accepted Answer

No decisions have been made regarding non-housing uses and this would be driven primarily by feedback from the community. The only criteria are that any wider site uses should provide clear community benefit.
Ideas currently being explored include:
•	open space and community amenity;
•	community growing initiatives;
•	biodiversity enhancement;
•	woodland or riparian planting;
•	habitat creation; and
•	improved active travel connections.
Community views would be central to shaping any future proposals.

Question 13

Wouldn’t any development create pressure for the rest of the field to be developed later?

Accepted Answer

This concern has been raised by many residents during consultation.
Subject to community support and future negotiations, one option being explored is whether the Trust could secure ownership of the entire field for the community.
The intention would be to:
•	safeguard substantial areas as open space and community amenity;
•	protect and enhance biodiversity and landscape character; and
•	ensure that any future development remained under community control.
Any future development within the field would therefore only happen at the request and discretion of the community.

Question 14

How would long-term community ownership and benefit be secured?

Accepted Answer

The Trust is exploring models where homes and wider community assets would remain under long-term community oversight.
If a proposal progressed in future:
•	homes could potentially be owned on behalf of the community by the Trust or a partner organisation;
•	management could be undertaken by an experienced housing association or managing agent; and
•	allocation policies could prioritise people with strong local connections and housing need.
Community ownership and long-term stewardship are at the heart of the Community Development Trust’s vision, reflecting a core aspiration identified in the Community Action Plan 2022.

Question 15

What does “community-led housing” actually mean?

Accepted Answer

Community-led housing is about local people playing a leading and fundamental role in solving their specific housing problems, creating genuinely long-term, affordable homes and strong, resilient communities in ways that are difficult to achieve through mainstream housing alone.

It is a broad initiative encompassing a range of approaches, including community groups, development trusts, cooperatives, co-housing, and can involve new build, self-build, regeneration or the use of existing buildings.
The core principles of community-led housing are:

•	It is a requirement that ongoing community engagement occurs throughout the development process.
•	The community does not have to initiate and manage the development, or build the house themselves, although some do.
•	The local community group or organisation owns, manages or stewards the homes in a way that suits them.
•	It is a requirement that the benefits of the scheme to the local area and/or specified community group are clearly defined and legally protected in perpetuity.

Community led housing can help address the shortage of affordable homes, a nationwide issue impacting many communities.

Question 16

Who would the homes be for?

Accepted Answer

The Trust is exploring a range of affordable housing tenure options, including:
•	social rent;
•	mid-market rent;
•	low-cost home ownership;
•	self-build plots; and
•	potentially limited open-market homes where appropriate to support viability.
Any future allocation policies would be shaped through community consultation and could prioritise:
•	people with strong local connections;
•	those unable to access suitable or affordable housing locally; and
•	households contributing to long-term community sustainability.

Question 17

How does this relate to local employment and retaining workers in the area?

Accepted Answer

Affordable housing, including affordable housing for local workers/key workers, was raised as a key issue in both the Community Action Plan (2022) and Local Place Plan (2025). It was also explored in the Housing Needs Survey (2022) carried out by the PH8 Community Matters and the Communities Housing Trust.

The availability or otherwise of affordable housing impacts on recruitment, staff retention and seasonal workers. Housing pressures can therefore affect the long-term sustainability of the community and economy. These issues are being explored in more detail through stakeholder engagement as part of the feasibility study, to inform the business case for any future community-led, housing project.

Question 18

Can existing infrastructure cope with additional homes?

Accepted Answer

Any future planning application would need to demonstrate that infrastructure capacity could accommodate additional development or that suitable mitigation measures could be provided.
This would include, but not limited to, assessment of:
•	roads and parking;
•	school capacity;
•	healthcare provision;
•	sewerage and drainage infrastructure;
•	road safety; and
•	wider community amenity.
Statutory consultees such as Scottish Water, Perth & Kinross Council, SEPA and Transport Scotland would all require to be consulted.
The Trust recognises that traffic, parking and infrastructure pressures are already major concerns within Dunkeld and Birnam and continue to support the Community Council with ongoing community consultations and action on these issues. 
The site’s location, adjacent to the riverside core path network, is one reason it is considered potentially compatible with the “20-minute neighbourhood” principles promoted through NPF4. It also recognises that policy aspirations and actual travel behaviours do not always align and that these concerns require careful consideration as part of the feasibility process.

Question 19

How would the Trust ensure non-housing community benefits are actually delivered?

Accepted Answer

The feasibility study includes preparation of a high-level business plan exploring:
•	potential funding models;
•	long-term management arrangements;
•	delivery partnerships; and
•	viable approaches to community ownership.
Potential future funding sources for non-housing community uses may include organisations that support:
•	community ownership;
•	affordable housing;
•	biodiversity enhancement;
•	active travel; and
•	wider community infrastructure.

Question 20

How would any proposal affect the existing River Tay path?

Accepted Answer

The existing riverside path forms part of the Core Path Network.
Any future proposal would be expected to:
•	retain and respect the existing path;
•	protect important riverside access routes;
•	maintain the field boundaries; and
•	explore opportunities for improved active travel connections.
Potential future routes would aim to integrate sensitively and naturally into the existing landscape.

Question 21

What about the environmental and biodiversity impacts?

Accepted Answer

Any future proposal would require assessment against National Planning Framework 4 and Perth & Kinross Council planning policies relating to:
•	biodiversity;
•	ecology;
•	landscape;
•	heritage;
•	flooding; and
•	environmental protection.
Depending on the scale and nature of any proposal, this could include:
•	Preliminary Ecological Appraisal;
•	Protected Species Surveys;
•	habitat surveys;
•	tree surveys and woodland management plans;
•	biodiversity enhancement strategies;
•	flood risk assessments; and
•	heritage and landscape assessments.
Protected species surveys may be required for bats, badgers, red squirrels, otters, breeding birds and freshwater ecology.
Planning policy increasingly expects development to leave biodiversity in a “better state” through measures such as:
•	habitat creation;
•	woodland and riparian planting;
•	ecological management;
•	integrated bird and bat boxes; and
•	wider biodiversity enhancement.

Question 22

How is the Trust addressing concerns about the potential loss of productive agricultural land and its impact on sustainability and food security?

Accepted Answer

The field has historically, and more recently, been used as productive agricultural land. Any future proposal would therefore require careful assessment against planning policy relating to the loss of agricultural land.
The Trust recognises the importance of balancing a range of priorities, including:
•	local housing need; 
•	environmental sustainability; 
•	biodiversity; 
•	food growing opportunities; and 
•	climate resilience. 
Concerns regarding the potential loss of agricultural land, and the wider implications this may have for food security, sustainability and climate resilience, are important considerations within the current feasibility work.
A key part of the ongoing discussions is exploring how significant areas of open space are retained and opportunities for community growing considered as part of any wider site proposals.

Question 23

How will the community continue to be informed and consulted?

Accepted Answer

Updates and consultation opportunities will continue to be shared through:
•	the Trust website;
•	Community Council communications;
•	social media;
•	local publications including The Bridge;
•	posters and community notices; and
•	future consultation events.
Statutory consultations, including the preparation of the Local Development Plan 3 process, also involve formal public consultation stages led by Perth & Kinross Council. Both the Community Council and the Development Trust are kept fully abreast of statutory consultation events relating to this community and publicise these through their own websites, social media and the Bridge.

DUNKELD, BIRNAM & DISTRICT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRUST - EST 2022

Frequently Asked Questions - Birnam Park Housing Development

Frequently asked questions