Scottish Borders Council

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, TD6 0SA

Contact: Fiona Walling 01835 826504  email  fwalling@scotborders.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Continuation of review of refusal of planning application to erect a replacement dwelling house on land W of Glenkinnon Lodge, Peelburnfoot, Clovenfords. 17/01008/FUL. 17/00053/RREF. pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Copies of the following papers attached:-

Additional documents:

Minutes:

MEMBERS

Councillor Aitchison and Councillor Small were not present at the beginning of the meeting for consideration of the undernoted application as Councillor Aitchison had declared an interest and Councillor Small had been absent when the initial consideration had taken place.

 

With reference to paragraph 3 of the Minute of 19 February 2018 the Local Review Body continued their consideration of the request to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of erection of replacement dwellinghouse on land west of Glenkinnon Lodge, Peelburnfoot, Clovenfords.  In response to the request by the Local Review Body for further procedure in the form of written submissions, in respect of the  amended site plan (reference 9303.1.02 B), there had been circulated copies of submissions from the Council’s ecology officer; landscape officer; planning officer; objectors; and a response to the submissions from the applicant. Also circulated were copies of all the original papers that accompanied the review. With guidance from the Legal Advisor, Members considered whether certain further matters included in the review documents and certain documents submitted as part of the further procedure constituted new evidence. For the reasons set out in Appendix l to this Minute, Members concluded that the applicant’s explanation of the difference in the Valuation Roll extracts, the newspaper article submitted by two objectors and the two additional tree reports presented by the applicant were pieces of new evidence that did not meet the test under Section 43B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.  These matters were therefore not referred to in their deliberations.  Members’ discussion focussed firstly on whether there was any evidence that the existing building, which it was proposed to replace, had been a dwellinghouse and secondly whether the proposal constituted a conversion.  Consideration was then given to whether the proposal was related to a building group and whether there was an economic requirement for the development.  Finally Members considered the impact of the proposal on the surrounding woodland amenity and in particular on the trees contained within a Tree Preservation Order.

 

DECISION

AGREED that:-

 

(a)        the review could now be determined without further procedure on the basis of the papers submitted and the further written submissions;

 

(b)          in accordance with Section 43B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 the review be determined without reference to the new evidence outlined in the paragraph above;

 

(c)        the proposal would be contrary to the Development Plan and that there were no other material considerations that would justify departure from the Development Plan; and

 

(d)       the officer’s decision to refuse the application be upheld and the application refused for the reasons detailed in Appendix I to this Minute.

 

MEMBERS

Councillors Aitchison and Small joined the meeting.

 

2.

Consider request for review of refusal of planning application to erect a dwellinghouse on land E of Keleden, Kelso. 17/01613/PPP. 18/00004/RREF. pdf icon PDF 89 KB

Copies of the following papers attached:-

Additional documents:

Minutes:

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr and Mrs B. Soar, per Aitken Turnbull Architects Ltd, 9 Bridge Place, Galashiels, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of erection of dwellinghouse on land east of Keleden, Ednam. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice); officer’s report; papers referred to in the officer’s report; consultations; support comments; objections; general comments; further representation and response from applicant; and a list of relevant policies. Members noted that the application site was outwith but adjoining the settlement boundary of Ednam as defined in the Local Development Plan.  Their ensuing discussion therefore focussed on whether there were strong reasons for an exceptional approval.  They attached significant weight to the recent erection of two dwellinghouses on the northern side of the road, which reduced the gap between the settlements of Ednam and Cliftonhill, and to the field boundary of the site which they considered represented a more logical boundary to Ednam than the current development boundary.

 

DECISION

AGREED that:-

 

(a)        the request for a review had been competently made in terms of Section 43A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997;

 

(b)       the review could be considered without the need for any further procedure on the basis of the papers submitted;

 

(c)        the proposal would be in keeping with the Development Plan; and

 

(d)       the officer’s decision to refuse the application be reversed and planning permission be granted subject to conditions and a legal agreement, for the reasons detailed in Appendix II to this Minute. 

 

 

3.

Consider request for review of refusal of planning application for an extension to form new living room at 16 Craig Brown Avenue, Selkirk. 17/01409/FUL. 18/00005/RREF. pdf icon PDF 63 KB

Copies of the following papers attached:-

Additional documents:

Minutes:

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr Harry Thomson, 16 Craig Brown           Avenue, Selkirk, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of an extension to form a new living room at 16 Craig Brown Avenue, Selkirk. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review; Decision Notice; officer’s report; papers referred to in the officer’s report; consultations; objections; general comment; and a list of relevant policies.  In their deliberations, Members referred to the original planning consent for the   single storey house at 16 Craig Brown Avenue, which included a condition requiring two off-street parking spaces.  They also noted that permitted development rights had been         removed when the development was approved; the implication being that an extension would cause overdevelopment of the site.  Whilst expressing sympathy with the applicant’s wish to extend his living space, Members considered the effect  of the loss of a parking space within the site and the impact of the proposed extension on the adjoining    properties and in particular on a proposed dwellinghouse on adjoining land, which had recently received planning approval. 

 

 

 

DECISION

AGREED that:-

 

(a)        the request for a review had been competently made in terms of Section 43A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997;

 

(b)       the review could be considered without the need for any further procedure on the basis of the papers submitted;

 

(c)        the proposal would be contrary to the Development Plan and that there were no other material considerations that would justify departure from the Development Plan; and

 

(d)       the officer’s decision to refuse the application be upheld for the reasons detailed in Appendix IIl to this Minute.

 

4.

Consider request for review of refusal of planning application to erect a dwellinghouse on land SE of Beckhope, Kailzie, Peebles. 17/01572/PPP. 18/00006/RREF. pdf icon PDF 85 KB

Copies of the following papers attached:-

Additional documents:

Minutes:

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mrs Anne McKelvey, per Ferguson Planning, 54 Island Street, Galashiels, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of the erection of a dwellinghouse on land south east of Beckhope, Kailzie, Peebles. Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice and officer’s report); papers referred to in the officer’s report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  The Local Review Body considered a piece of new evidence that had been submitted with the Notice of Review as detailed in Appendix IV to this Minute. After applying the test under Section 43B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 Members concluded, for the reasons given, that reference could be made to this new evidence as part of the determination of the review.  Having agreed that there was a building group in the vicinity of the site Members noted that there had been a previous approval for a dwellinghouse on land to the south of the application site but that, due to woodland being established on the site a recent application to renew consent had been unsuccessful.  Members’ attention focussed on whether the alternative application site now proposed related well to the existing building group in terms of its location, character and scale.  Consideration was also given to the fact that the site was located within a previously undeveloped field.  After a lengthy debate Members’ opinion remained divided on these issues.

 

VOTE

 

Councillor Aitchison, seconded by Councillor Small, moved that the decision to refuse the application be upheld.

 

Councillor Mountford, seconded by Councillor Fullarton, moved as an amendment that the decision to refuse the application be reversed and the application approved.

 

On a show of hands Members voted as follows:-

 

Motion             - 2 votes

Amendment     - 6 votes

 

The amendment was accordingly carried and the application approved.

 

DECISION

DECIDED that:-

 

(a)          the request for a review had been competently made in terms of Section 43A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997;

 

(b)          in accordance with Section 43B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 the review could be determined with reference to the new evidence submitted with the Notice of Review documentation;

 

(c)        the review could be considered without the need for any further procedure on the basis of the papers submitted;

 

(d)       the proposal would be in keeping with the Development Plan; and

 

(e)        the officer’s decision to refuse the application be reversed and planning permission be granted subject to conditions and a legal agreement, for the reasons detailed in Appendix IV to this Minute. 

 

5.

Consider request for review of refusal of planning application for change of use from retail to dog grooming practice at 38 Bank Street, Galashiels. 17/01704/FUL. 18/00007/RREF. pdf icon PDF 86 KB

Copies of the following papers attached:-

Additional documents:

Minutes:

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr S. Wilson, 10 Springfield Square, St Boswells, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of change of use from retail to dog grooming practice. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice); officer’s report; papers referred to in the officer’s report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  Members noted that the social media comments submitted by the applicant with the Notice of Review constituted new evidence as these had not been lodged with the appointed planning officer when the application was determined.  They agreed that as this evidence did not meet the tests set out in Section 43B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 they would proceed to consider the case without reference to this information.  Members noted that the application was for a Class 2 use and that the site, formerly a retail unit and now vacant, was within the Core Activity Area in Galashiels where policy normally opposed any uses other than Classes 1 and 3 at ground floor level.  In the ensuing discussion Members discussed the nature of the business that was proposed for the premises, recognising that a dog grooming practice represented a niche service for which there was likely to be a demand.  They noted that visits to the premises were likely to be associated with linked shopping trips, thereby increasing footfall in the town centre.  In view of the pressure on small scale units within the town centre and the presence of large supermarkets Members considered the need for flexibility to provide a variety of different small units in Bank Street.  The majority of Members indicated support of the application subject to the use of the premises being restricted to the dog grooming practice and not for any other Class 2 use. Councillor Small was opposed to this view and moved that the officer’s decision to refuse the application be upheld but there was no seconder to this motion.

 

DECISION

DECIDED that:-

 

(a)        the request for a review had been competently made in terms of Section 43A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997;

 

(b)       in accordance with Section 43B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 the review be determined without reference to the new evidence submitted with the Notice of Review documentation;

 

(a)          the review could be considered without the need for any further procedure on the basis of the papers submitted;

 

(b)          the proposal would be in keeping with the Development Plan; and

 

(e)        the officer’s decision to refuse the application be reversed and planning permission be granted subject to conditions and an informative for the reasons detailed in Appendix V to this Minute. 

 

 

 

CONTACT US

Scottish Borders Council

Council Headquarters Newtown St. Boswells Melrose TD6 0SA

Tel: 0300 100 1800

Email:

For more Contact Details