Agenda and minutes

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr & Mrs James Cook, per IRD Design Ltd, New Harbour Building, Gunsgreen Quay, Eyemouth to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of change of use from storage barn, alterations and extension to form a dwellinghouse on land east of Flemington Farmhouse, West Flemington, Eyemouth.  Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review including the Decision Notice and officer’s report; consultations; emails regarding the Decision Notice date; and list of relevant policies.  The Planning Advisor gave clarification about the error in respect of the original date of the Decision Notice.  An invitation to resubmit the Notice of Review had not been taken up by the applicant therefore Members agreed to give no weight to the commentary in the Notice of Review regarding the initial Decision Notice date.  In their discussion Members recognised the interesting proposal to convert a farm building of this kind to a dwellinghouse.  However, they concluded that the conversion failed to meet the criteria set out in the Local Plan policies for conversion of buildings to a house and that, as there were no other material considerations to justify departure from the Development Plan, to accept the proposal could set a precedent in respect of other applications to convert similar buildings.

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 l to this Minute.

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from Cleek Poultry Ltd, The Tractor Shed, Kirkburn, Cardrona, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of erection of a cattle court incorporating storage areas and staff facilities and erection of animal feed silo in field No. 0328 at Kirkburn, Cardrona. Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review; Decision Notice; officer’s report; previous application referred to in the report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  In their discussion Members were sympathetic to the appellant’s position in respect of the attempt to establish a viable business on this smallholding.  However, they concluded that the business plan was lacking necessary detail for the proposal to be justified under policy, particularly in respect of the details of the purchase of cattle, lease of additional land to support the cattle and the sale of the end product.  Members also concluded that the scale and mass of the proposed cattle court and silo would have a negative impact on the Special Landscape Area in which it was situated and the adjacent archaeological site.  Concern was expressed about the relationship of this proposal with the approved proposal for chalets in an adjacent part of the field and the apparent lack of an overall masterplan for this site.

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 ll to this Minute.

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from Cleek Poultry Ltd, The Tractor Shed, Kirkburn, Cardrona, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of erection of timber processing building incorporating biomass plant room and staff welfare provision in field No. 0328 at Kirkburn, Cardrona. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review; Decision Notice; officer’s report; previous applications referred to in the report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  Members discussed the impact of the proposed biomass processing building within the Special landscape Area and noted that at the height proposed the building would project above the trees to the north of the public road.  They were also concerned that there was no business plan to support the enterprise, no detail of from where timber would be sourced and no indication of how this proposal for timber processing related to previous proposals for cold storage on the same site.  Members recommended that the applicant put together a masterplan for this piece of land to clearly demonstrate the linkages between the development proposals.

DECISION

AGREED:-

(a)      that 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 llI to this Minute.

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr Alan John Redpath, 62 Castle Street, Duns to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of replacement windows and door at 62 Castle Street, Duns. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review; Decision Notice; officer’s report; consultation; and a list of relevant policies.  Members noted that there was also a current appeal in respect of Listed Building Consent for this application with the DPEA.  It was noted that the building was Grade B listed and that the adopted policy for such buildings recommended that windows and doors should only be replaced if they were beyond repair.  Under the terms of this policy Members agreed that they could not consider the proposal to replace the windows and the design of the replacement windows without clarification regarding the condition of the existing windows.  Members accepted that the existing door was not original and were of the opinion that it was not attractive and could be replaced.  However, the request was made for a more detailed technical specification in respect of the proposed replacement door.

DECISION

AGREED:-

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

(b)       that the review could not be considered without further procedure in the form of further information as follows;

(i)            an independent condition survey of the windows which the applicant was proposing to replace, carried out by a chartered architect or other suitably qualified professional; and

(ii)          a more detailed technical specification in respect of the proposed replacement door.

(c)       to continue consideration of the review on 19^th September 2016 if the information requested could be provided by that time or at the meeting of 17^th October 2016 at the latest.

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr H. Armstrong, per HM Architecture Ltd, Bloomfield, Heatherlie Park, Selkirk, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of the erection of a dwellinghouse and garage in the garden ground of Lindisfarne, Gattonside. Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review; Decision Notice; officer’s report; paper referred to in the report, consultations, objection; and list of relevant policies.  Members noted that the application site was within the settlement boundary and agreed that in most respects the development would comply with the Local Development Plan 2016.  Their discussion then focused on the adequacy of the access with which the proposed site would be served in terms of road and pedestrian safety. Recognising the limitations of the access, from both directions but particularly to the east through the Loan as regards gradient, visibility and passing opportunities, Members’ opinion was divided as to whether traffic generated by the addition of a single house would lead to significant additional potential implications on road safety.  After lengthy discussion Members agreed that they wished to take a more detailed appraisal of the access by way of an unaccompanied site visit.

DECISION

AGREED:-

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

(b)       that the review could not be considered without further procedure in the form of an unaccompanied site visit; and

(c)        to hold an unaccompanied site visit at 9 am on Monday 5^th September 2016 and to reconvene on the same day at Council Headquarters at 10 am, or as soon as possible thereafter, to continue consideration of the review.