Agenda item

Copies of the following papers attached:-

There had been circulated copies of a request from Stonefalls Development Partnership c/o Camerons Strachan Yuill Architects, 1 Wilderhaugh, Galashiels to review the non-determination of a planning application for the erection of 3 No. single bedroom holiday cabins and associated ground works to create 3 parking bays on Land West of Burnmouth Parish Church, Eyemouth.  The Review Body noted that the review was submitted against non-determination of the planning application, as the Council had not determined the application within the agreed application processing period. This constituted a deemed refusal and Members were required to make a ‘De Novo’ decision on the application. The supporting papers included the Notice of Review; Additional Information, Consultations Replies, Objection Comments and List of Policies.  The Members noted that part of the site had a development history of cottages but that this was both historic and related mainly to the access/parking area. The Review Body also noted that the defined settlement boundary for Burnmouth contained the parking and access road but only a very small proportion of the three proposed holiday pods.  The Review Body then considered the issue of safe vehicular access to and egress from the development and noted all submissions on the matter. Members were of the opinion that the steep gradient of the public road, the narrowness of the road, the position of the bend, the acute angle of the site access on that bend for left-turning vehicles into the site and the differing levels would cause significant road safety issues, as indicated by the Roads Officer and objectors. Members went onto to discuss the objections from Nature Scot and other respondents in relation to the claims over land stability in the vicinity, Nature Scot having requested an engineer’s stability assessment.  There was concern that construction work could cause landslip onto the shoreline, damaging reef habitat and ultimately impacting on the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coastline Special Area of Conservation (SAC).  The concerns of the Ecology Officer in relation to breeding birds and protected species were considered in view of the fact that the submitted survey had not been carried out within the activity season and there was potential impact on breeding birds and protected species, including skylark and peregrine falcon.  As the development of the three holiday pods was largely located outwith the Burnmouth Settlement Boundary, the Review Body also assessed the application against the principle of Policy ED7 and whilst Members understood that a business case had been submitted as required and noted that tourism objectives had been claimed to be met by the proposals, they considered that the development exhibited overriding issues resulting in non-compliance with settlement boundary, roads and ecology policies. The Review Body concluded that these issues were not outweighed by the claimed economic and tourism benefits and agreed that the Officers decision be upheld.

The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 12.20 p.m. to allow Members time to formulate the wording for the reasons for refusal and given the time, took the opportunity for Members to have lunch prior to reconvening at 1 p.m.

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 deemed refusal of the application be upheld and the application refused, for the reasons detailed below and in Appendix IV to this Minute.

1.            The application is contrary to Policy PMD4 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan as the development lies largely outwith the development boundary of Burnmouth, and there is insufficient community benefit demonstrated to outweigh the significant adverse effects on the landscape setting of the settlement and the natural heritage of the area.

2.            The application is contrary to Policies PMD2, PMD5 and ED7 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan in that the site cannot be accessed without significant adverse impacts on road safety, due to the angle and gradient of the site access junction with the public road.

3.            The application is contrary to Policy EP1 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan in that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposal can be developed without significant detrimental effects on the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coastline Special Area of Conservation through potential landslip.

4.            The application is contrary to Policy EP2 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan in that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposal can be developed without significant detrimental effects on breeding birds or Schedule 1 raptors at the site.