Agenda item

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of the request from Ms Jess Windsor, per Urban Animation, 22 Westhall Gardens, Edinburgh to review the decision to refuse the planning application for erection of 15 No huts with associated access and car parking on land East of Wester Deans, West Linton. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review; Decision Notice; Officer’s Report; papers referred to in the Officer’s Report; Consultations; general comment; and a list of policies. In their initial discussion Members noted that the proposal was not for a commercial business and therefore did not require the submission of a business case in support of the application. Members initially discussed the site of the proposed development in terms of visual impact and compatibility within the rural surroundings.  With regard to the suitability of the proposal, Members discussed the means of access to the site and the practicality of the use of sustainable transport.  Whilst recognising that the huts would be individually owned, they expressed concerns about a lack of detail about servicing the site and the absence of an overall management scheme. After a lengthy debate, opinion remained divided as to whether these concerns could be addressed by suspensive conditions.

VOTE

Councillor Fullarton, seconded by Councillor Anderson moved that the decision to refuse the application be upheld.

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

            Members voted as follows:-

            Motion             - 2 votes

Amendment     - 4 votes

The amendment was accordingly carried and the application approved,

DECISION

DECIDED that:-

(a)        the request for 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 consistent with the Development Plan; and

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