Agenda item

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from Mr Robert Harrison, per D & H Farmer, Meldon Design Studio, 2 Elcho Street Brae, Peebles, to review refusal of the planning application for demolition of dwellinghouse and erection of two dwellinghouses at Benrig, at 1 Cuddyside, Peebles. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review; application referred to in appeal statement; Decision Notice; Officer’s Report; papers referred to in the Officer’s Report; Consultations; objections; and a list of policies. The Planning Advisor drew attention to information which had been submitted with the Notice of Review documentation but which had not been before the Appointed Planning Officer at the time of determination.  This related to planning consent 19/01471/FUL and in particular the SEPA responses to that application. Following advice from the Chief Legal Officer, Members were of the opinion that planning decisions on other sites did not represent new information, that there was no requirement to apply Section 43(B) of the Regulations and that this information could be taken into consideration.  Members noted that the site of the proposed development was within the settlement boundary of Peebles and within Peebles Conservation Area. In the ensuing discussion they were concerned that the proposal represented overdevelopment of the site, the higher ridge line of the proposed building would have a detrimental impact on the conservation area and they commented on the lack of boundary treatment. Members also noted the objection from SEPA, relating to flood risk and the concerns of the Roads Planning Officer relating to lack of parking and adequacy of the access.

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)       information in the form of a previous planning consent, which had not been before the Appointed Planning Officer at the time of determination, did not represent new information, that there was no requirement to apply Section 43(B) of the Regulations and that the information could be taken into consideration; 

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

(e)        the officer’s decision to refuse the application be upheld but varied and the application be refused, for the reasons detailed in Appendix IV to this Minute.