Agenda and minutes

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request for review from Ms Evelyn Brown and Mr John Kirk, per Keith Renton Architect, Humestanes Studio, Greenlaw, concerning the failure of the Council to determine their application within the period prescribed by the regulations.  The application was for the erection of a detached garage with first floor studio, alterations and extension to dwellinghouse at Danderhall Cottage, St Boswells. Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review; consultation; officer’s report; response to officer’s report; and a list of relevant policies. In their initial consideration the majority view of Members was that the proposed extension was well designed and complementary to the existing dwellinghouse. A lengthy discussion followed about the suitability of the proposed garage building in terms of its height, scale, visual impact and relationship to the house and Members’ opinion was divided.

VOTE

Councillor Aitchison, seconded by Councillor Small, moved in support of the deemed decision of the officer that the application be refused for the reasons set out in the officer’s report.

Councillor Miers, seconded by Councillor Mountford, moved as an amendment that the officer’s deemed decision be reversed and the application be approved, subject to conditions to ensure that the ridgeline of the garage be no higher than that of the dwellinghouse Danderhall Cottage and that the garage building be used only as an ancillary building to the dwellinghouse.

On a show of hands Members voted as follows:-

Motion             - 2 votes

Amendment     - 7 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)       the review could be considered without the need for any further procedure on the basis of the papers submitted;

(c)        the proposal was consistent with the Development Plan and that there were no other material considerations that would justify departure from the Development Plan; and

(d)       the officer’s deemed decision to refuse the application be reversed and the application for planning permission be granted, subject to conditions, as detailed in Appendix I 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 an agricultural storage building with welfare accommodation on land west of former William Cree Memorial Church, Kirkburn, Cardrona.  Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice); officer’s report; papers referred to in the report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  Members expressed concern at the potential visual impact of the proposed building and the potential conflict of the proposal with the consented holiday development on the site, noting that the proposed building was higher than that which had been required by condition for the proposed holiday chalets.  Members also commented that, in the absence of a business plan, they could not consider whether there was any economic justification for the development.

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 II 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 an agricultural storage building with welfare accommodation on land west of former William Cree Memorial Church, Kirkburn, Cardrona.  Included in the supporting papers were the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice); officer’s report; papers referred to in the report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  Members expressed concern at the potential visual impact of the proposed building and the potential conflict of the proposal with the consented holiday development on the site, noting that the proposed building was higher than that which had been required by condition for the proposed holiday chalets.  Members also commented that, in the absence of a business plan, they could not consider whether there was any economic justification for the development.

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 III to this Minute.

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from GS Chapman Vehicle Body Repairs, per Ericht Planning & Property Consultants, Gifford House, Bonnington Road, Peebles, to review the decision to refuse the planning application in respect of the erection of a vehicle body repair workshop and associated parking on land north west of Dunrig, Spylaw Farm, Lamancha, West Linton.  The supporting papers included the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice); officer’s report; papers referred to in the report; consultations; and a list of relevant policies.  The Local Review Body considered new evidence that had been submitted with the Notice of Review. In terms of Section 43B of the Act, Members concluded that this material had not been properly raised and proceeded to consider the case without reference to this evidence.  Members were satisfied that there was an economic need for the proposed development and noted that the applicant’s attempts to find a site within the development boundary had been unsuccessful. After lengthy discussion about whether this particular countryside location was the appropriate site, a majority of Members were of the opinion that they could not make a decision without a site visit.  There was no opposition to the proposal to defer consideration of the case to allow an unaccompanied site visit to take place.  

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)         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; and

(c)        the review could not be considered without further procedure in the form of an unaccompanied site visit to take place on a date to be arranged.

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request for review from Mr J McGrath, per RM Architecture Ltd, Bloomfield, Heatherlie Park, Selkirk, concerning the decision to grant planning permission subject to conditions relating to the erection of a dwellinghouse and detached garage on land north east of Dundas Cottage, Ettrick, Selkirk.  Included in the supporting papers were the Decision Notice; Notice of Review; officer’s report; papers referred to in the report; consultations; representation; and a list of relevant policies.  Although the applicant had sought review of one condition imposed on the planning permission Members noted that the review of the case was “de novo” and considered afresh the application for Approval of Matters Specified in Conditions relating to the earlier Planning Permission in Principle.  After agreeing that the proposal was acceptable and that all the other conditions imposed on the planning consent were appropriate, Members turned their attention to the condition which was the subject of the Notice of Review, which required a slate roof on the dwellinghouse rather than the applicant’s proposed use of a metal profile sheet roof.  Members considered the evidence presented of the buildings, in the vicinity of the site, with corrugated roofing.  Although a view was expressed that a slate roof would be more suitable the majority of Members concluded that the material proposed by the applicant would be complimentary to buildings in the local area subject to this being grey in colour.

DECISION

AGREED:-

(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 was consistent with 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 be varied and the application for planning permission be granted, subject to revised conditions and informatives, as detailed in Appendix IV to this Minute.