Farming

The developer claims that the land is of “no use in terms of farming.” This assertion is factually incorrect and is directly contradicted by the Macaulay Land Capability for Agriculture (LCA) classification, which identifies the site as Grade 3.2 agricultural land. 

While Grade 3.2 is not defined as “prime agricultural land” under national policy, it remains productive land capable of supporting a range of agricultural activities, including rotational cropping, improved grassland, silage production, and livestock grazing and rearing. It is versatile land with clear and demonstrable agricultural capability. The description of such land as being of “no use” for farming is therefore misleading, unsupported, and contrary to established land capability evidence.

 It is also important to clarify that the current lack of agricultural activity on the site is a matter of landowner choice rather than land capability. The current owner has chosen not to farm the land for a number of years. However, prior to this period, the land was actively and regularly farmed while the owner resided in the adjacent dwelling, clearly demonstrating that the site is viable and capable of productive agricultural use. Temporary or deliberate non-use does not diminish the intrinsic quality of the soil nor its long-term agricultural potential. 

National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) places strong emphasis on the protection and sustainable management of soils. Policy 5 (Soils) requires development proposals to protect and enhance soils and to safeguard agricultural land and soil resources, recognising their importance for food production, climate resilience, and long-term sustainability. Even where land is not categorised as “prime,” its loss must still be properly justified, particularly where it remains capable of supporting productive agriculture. 

Under Policy 5 (Soils) of NPF4, which Highland Council applies in development management, development proposals are expected to minimise adverse impacts on soil resources and demonstrate that land has been used in a sustainable and appropriate manner. The application must therefore show that development on this site represents the most appropriate option, having fully considered alternatives on less productive or previously developed land. 

The application as submitted does not demonstrate that the loss of productive agricultural land is unavoidable, nor that alternative sites on lesser quality land or brownfield sites have been fully considered. There is no clear evidence that the agricultural value of the land has been properly weighed within the planning balance.

 In a regional context where productive agricultural land is limited and increasingly important for food resilience and environmental sustainability, the permanent loss of Grade 3.2 land represents an irreversible impact on local agricultural capacity. Incremental losses of such land through development collectively erode the agricultural resource base and undermine long-term sustainability objectives. The application fails to demonstrate that: 

• the loss of this productive agricultural land is unavoidable, 

• reasonable alternative sites on lower-quality or previously developed land have been fully explored, or

 • the proposal is justified in light of national policy requirements to protect soil and agricultural resources. For these reasons,

 We request that the planning authority gives substantial weight to the verified agricultural land classification, the documented history of agricultural use, and the requirements of NPF4 Policy 5, and that the application be refused due to its unjustified impact on productive agricultural land and reliance on misleading claims regarding land capability. The Scottish Government’s soil and agricultural land classification maps can be viewed here: