Agendas, reports and minutes

Minutes of Meeting of the Planning Review Body held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Wednesday, 17 June 2015 at 10.30am.

Present:

Dr A Sinclair, Mr G Farlow, Dr D Alston, Mrs I Campbell, Mr D Fallows, Mr B Lobban, Mr R Saxon and Mr T Prag

In Attendance:

Mr P Adams, Solicitor/Clerk
Mr D Polson, Independent Planning Adviser to the Planning Review Body
Ms L Lee, Committee Administrator

Dr A Sinclair in the Chair

Preliminaries

The Chairman confirmed that the meeting would be webcast, and gave a short briefing on the Council’s webcasting procedure and protocol.

Business

1. Apologies for Absence
Liesgeulan

An apology for absence was received from Mrs I McCallum.

2. Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

Item 5.2 – Mr D Fallows and Mr B Lobban (non-financial)

Item 5.4 – Mr T Prag (non-financial)

3. Minutes of Meeting of 23 April 2015

The Minutes of Meeting held on 23 April, 2015, copies of which had been circulated, were APPROVED.

4. for Determination of Notices of Review

The Clerk confirmed that, for all subsequent items on the agenda, Members had contained in their Booklets all information as supplied by all parties to the Notice of Review. Members needed to assess each application against the development plan and all relevant material considerations, taking account of the documents lodged by the applicant and interested parties, and to decide whether the application accorded with or was contrary to the development plan. Having carried out that assessment, Members needed to decide if the weight attached to material considerations added to or outweighed their assessment of the application against the development plan.

The Clerk also confirmed that Google Earth and Streetview could be used during the meeting; Members were reminded of the potential limitations of using these systems in that images may have been captured a number of years ago and may not reflect the current position. All the Notices of Review were competent.

5. New Notices of Review to be Determined

5.1 Site a static caravan, Bridge Cottage, Bridgend, Brora, KW9 6NR –Clark, 15-00021 (RB-20-15)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 15-00021-Clark for siting of a static caravan, at Bridge Cottage, Bridgend, Brora, KW9 6NR, for Mr J Clark.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and his advice with regard to the way the Review should be determined (item 4 above refers), the Review Body AGREED that its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet A of the agenda papers, and that neither a site inspection nor a hearing, as requested by the applicant, were required.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review, which related to whether the condition imposed on temporary planning consent for a static caravan, in terms of the 5-year time limit on the given consent, was reasonable – the applicant was looking for the permission to be in place for 20 years.

Points raised in discussion included that temporary permission for a static caravan was usually given on the understanding that a caravan would provide a temporary residence whilst the occupant built an adjacent house; this was not the case here.

Whilst it was accepted that the caravan would be used as the applicant’s home for most of the year, and would not be rented out. Members were generally minded that 5 years’ permission was reasonable – 20 years was too long. The applicant would be able to re-apply for planning permission when required.

The Review Body DISMISSED the Notice of Review on the grounds as set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice.

5.2 Erection of House in Garden Ground at Airleywight, The Crescent, Kingussie, PH21 IJZ – Hunt, 15-00023 (RB-21-15)

Mr D Fallows and Mr B Lobban each declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that he was one of the local Members for Ward 21, Badenoch and Strathspey, and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review.  Mr Fallows and Mr Lobban both left the Chamber for the duration of this item.

There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 15-00023-Hunt for erection of a house on garden ground at Airleywight, The Crescent, Kingussie, PH21 IJZ, for Mr A Hunt.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and his advice with regard to the way the Review should be determined (item 4 above refers), the Review Body AGREED that its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet B of the agenda papers.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review, which related to whether the proposed house was acceptable in terms of Planning Policy.

In discussion, Members gave consideration to the density and pattern of housing in the vicinity, and the character of the area and the existing property. The likelihood that a neighbouring property would be overlooked, and the fact that the main frontage of the existing house looked onto the proposed house, were also taken into account. Whilst accepting that housing had been granted in garden ground of other properties in the area, Members were minded that in this instance, the proposed building would constitute over development and would change the character of the area and the amenity space around the existing house.

The Review Body DISMISSED the Notice of Review on the grounds as set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice.

Mr Fallows and Mr Lobban returned to the meeting.

5.3 Erection of Bus Shelter at Cairnald House, Swiney Road, Latheron, Caithness, KW3 6BT – Gunn, 15-00027 (RB-22-15)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 15-00027-Gunn for erection of a bus shelter at Cairnald House, Swiney Road, Latheron, Caithness, KW3 6BT, for Mr I Gunn.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and his advice with regard to the way the Review should be determined (item 4 above refers), the Review Body AGREED that its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet C of the agenda papers, and that a site inspection, as requested by the applicant, was not required.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review, which related to whether the condition imposed on temporary planning consent for a bus shelter for school children, in terms of the 5-year time limit on the given consent, was reasonable – the applicant was looking for the permission to be in place to 2030, as this was when his youngest child would leave school.

In discussion, Members were minded that the applicant’s request was reasonable. The bus shelter was well made and attractive and was unlikely to cause a problem should the family move away.

The Review Body APPROVED the Notice of Review, such that the cessation date of the temporary permission be amended to 2030, subject to amended planning conditions requiring the bus shelter to be maintained in a safe and tidy state at all times, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and in consultation with the Roads Authority; and for the shelter to be maintained in the external finishing materials and colour scheme originally approved, unless agreed in writing by the Planning Authority – in the interests of visual amenity and road safety, given the type, construction and prominent siting of the bus shelter.

5.4 Erection of House on Land North of Gatehouse, Blackpark Farm, Westhill, Inverness IV2 5BP – Alexander, 14-00047 (RB-6-15)

Mr T Prag declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that he was one of the local Members for Ward 20, Inverness South, and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review.  Mr Prag left the Chamber for the remainder of the meeting.

Dr D Alston, Mr D Fallows and Mr G Farlow did not take part in this item as they had not been present when it had been discussed by the Review Body on previous occasions.

Members were reminded that, at its meeting on 10 March 2015, the Review Body had agreed that planning permission for the proposed property be granted on condition that a s.75 agreement was put in place, tying the development to an adduced agricultural need. A letter from the applicant’s agent dated 16 June 2015 had been received, advising that the applicant’s circumstances had since changed: it was now likely that only two fields would remain of the farm. The letter indicated that the S75 would be acceptable tying occupation of the house in relation to land parcels 1, 2 and 4, and that the Review Body view the request sympathetically.

The meeting was adjourned for around 10 minutes to allow Members to read the letter and to view large scale versions of the maps provided by the agent. At the recommencement of the meeting, the Clerk iterated that during the adjournment Members had been shown the revised area of land to which the s.75 would apply, and given a full explanation of the changed circumstances as set out in the tabled letter.

Debate and Decision

In response to questions, clarification was given that it was highly unlikely the s.75 could be concluded, as the reason for it – to support agriculture by freeing up the farmhouse for use by the next generation – was no longer the case. Members therefore needed to consider whether planning permission for the proposed house could be granted without an associated agricultural need. Members were also advised that, should circumstances change again, and the farm continue operating, the applicant could reapply for planning permission.

Following discussion, Members were minded that planning permission be not granted for the proposed house, as the s.75 could no longer be applied.

The Review Body DISMISSED the Notice of Review, as the application no longer met the terms of the Council’s Planning Policies; and AGREED that the reasons for the decision be delegated to Officers in consultation with the Chair, and brought to the next Committee for approval.

The meeting ended at 11.10 a.m.