Agenda item

Copies of the following papers attached:-

review of 21/01982/FUL 

There had been circulated copies of a request from Mr Graeme Forsyth, c/o Andrew Walker, to review the decision to refuse the planning application for the change of use from Agricultural Store, alteration and extension to form dwellinghouse with garage.  The supporting papers included the Notice of Review (including the Decision Notice and Officer’s Report); Papers referred to in the Officer’s report; additional information and list of policies.  The Planning Adviser drew attention to information, in the form of a 3D image of the proposed new development which had been submitted with the Notice of review documentation but which had not been before the Appointed Officer at the time of determination.  Members agreed that the information was new but considered that it met the Section 43B test, was material to the determination of the Review and could be considered without further procedure.   After considering all relevant information, the Local Review Body concluded that the development was contrary to the Development Plan and that there were no other material considerations that would justify departure from the Development Plan. Members considered that the scale of the new-build additions would be excessive in scale and overbearing in relation to the existing building. This could result in the existing building appearing to be a subservient element, resulting in an incongruous relationship of little architectural merit. The Review Body concluded that a reduced scale extension would be more appropriate.  Consequently, the application was refused.

DECISION

AGREED 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 proposed dwellinghouse was contrary to Policy HD2 (C - Conversions) of the Local Development Plan 2016 in that the proposed conversion and extension would not be in keeping with the scale and character of the existing building.

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