Agendas, reports and minutes

Planning Review Body

Date: Wednesday, 12 April 2017

Minutes: Read the Minutes

Minutes of Meeting of the Planning Review Body held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Wednesday, 12 April 2017 at 10.30 am.

Present:

Mrs I Campbell, Mr G Farlow, Mrs I McCallum, Mr M Reiss, Dr A Sinclair

In Attendance:

Mrs K Lyons, Solicitor/Clerk
Mr D Polson, Independent Planning Adviser to the Planning Review Body
Mr S Taylor, Administrative Assistant

Dr A Sinclair in the Chair (Items 1 – 4 and 6.1 – 6.3)
Mr M Reiss in the Chair (Items 5.1 and 5.2)

Preliminaries

The Chair confirmed that the meeting would not be filmed and webcast due to a technical fault.

Business

1. Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr D Fallows, Mr B Lobban, Mr T Prag and Mr R Saxon.

2. Declarations of Interest

Items 5.1 and 5.2 – Mrs I Campbell and Dr A Sinclair (both non-financial)

3. Minutes of Meeting of 10 March 2017

The Minutes of Meeting held on 10 March 2017, copies of which had been circulated, were APPROVED.

4. Criteria for Determination of Notices of Review

The Clerk confirmed that, for all subsequent items on the agenda, Members had contained in their USB Flash Drives all of the information 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. Notices of Review Previously Considered

5.1 Erection of House on Land 90M SW of Acarsaid, Kishorn – Mr & Mrs R Matheson, 16/05120/PIP, 17/00010/RBREF (RB-15-17)

Declarations of Interest – Mrs I Campbell and Dr A Sinclair each declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that they were local Members for Ward 6, Wester Ross, Strathpeffer and Lochalsh, and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review. Mrs I Campbell and Dr A Sinclair both left the Chamber for the duration of this item.

Mr M Reiss took the chair for this and the following item.

There had been re-circulated Notice of Review 17/00010/RBREF for the erection of a house on Land 90M SW of Acarsaid, Kishorn for Mr & Mrs R Matheson.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and her advice with regard to the way the Review should be determined (item 4 above refers), the Review Body discussed whether its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Members’ USB Flash Drives (which included the information sought by the Review Body at its meeting on 10 March 2017), no further procedure having been requested by the applicants.

Members requested sight of Google Earth and Streetview to inform their understanding of the application site. The Independent Planning Adviser provided this.

Responding to a point of order raised as to whether the Review Body, whilst being quorate, was in a position to determine this application and the subsequent application on the agenda (item 5.2) without a majority of its membership being present, the Clerk explained that, in terms of the legislation and regulations as set out by the Scottish Government, the minimum number of members required to review decisions taken by appointed officers was three. She highlighted that in some local authority areas in Scotland only three members were appointed to their respective review body and that the Scottish Government had not raised any concerns regarding this. She confirmed that as there were currently three members present, the Review Body was quorate and that there was nothing in terms of statute or regulations made thereunder to prevent the Review Body from taking a decision, provided that all three members present were satisfied that enough information had been provided to proceed to determine the application, the lack of a majority of members from the Review Body did not preclude the Review Body determining the application. She confirmed that the deferral of the application previously was to go back to the applicant and interested parties to ensure that enough information had been provided to understand the relationship of the proposed development with what had already been granted approval. Both the applicant and interested parties had taken the opportunity to provide fulsome information to allow the Review Body to take that decision at this meeting.

Thereafter, the Review Body AGREED that its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Members’ USB Flash Drives and the Google Earth/Streetview presentation, no further procedure having been requested by the applicants.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork and the Google Earth presentation, the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.

During discussion, contrasting views were expressed, including that:-

The proposed development was out of keeping with the pattern of local development and would have a negative impact on the surrounding open countryside;
Whilst it was acknowledged that the proposed development could have an impact on the view West from the A896 public road, there were already a number of buildings in the surrounding area and this additional house would not cause too much of an imposition on the eye of passing tourists;
The importance of providing housing in rural areas such as Wester Ross was emphasised; and
Whilst some development had already been permitted on the adjacent site, there was limited potential for further development due to the impact any proposed building could have on the existing settlement pattern.

Following discussion, Mr G Farlow confirmed that he was minded to approve the Notice of Review; however, as the consensus of the other two Members present was to dismiss the Notice of Review, he chose not to put forward an amendment to approve the proposed development as he would fail to find a seconder.

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 on Land 40M West of Acarsaid, Kishorn – Mr & Mrs R Matheson, 16/05121/PIP, 17/00011/RBREF (RB-16-17)

There had been re-circulated Notice of Review 17/00011/RBREF for the erection of a house on Land 40M West of Acarsaid, Kishorn for Mr & Mrs R Matheson.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and her 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 Members’ USB Flash Drives (which included the information sought by the Review Body at its meeting on 10 March 2017), and the Google Earth/Streetview presentation provided during Item 5.1 on the agenda, no further procedure having been requested by the applicants.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body reiterated the opinions expressed during its determination of the previous application (item 5.1 on the Agenda), which included:-

The proposed development was out of keeping with the pattern of local development and would have a negative impact on the surrounding open countryside;
Whilst it was acknowledged that the proposed development could have an impact on the view West from the A896 public road, there were already a number of buildings in the surrounding area and this additional house would not cause too much of an imposition on the eye of passing tourists;
The importance of providing housing in rural areas such as Wester Ross was emphasised; and
Whilst some development had already been permitted on the adjacent site, there was limited potential for further development due to the impact any proposed building could have on the existing settlement pattern.

Mr G Farlow confirmed that he was minded to approve the Notice of Review; however, as the consensus of the other two Members present was to dismiss the Notice of Review, he chose not to put forward an amendment to approve the proposed development as he would fail to find a seconder.

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

Mrs I Campbell and Dr A Sinclair returned to the meeting.

Dr A Sinclair in the chair

6. New Notices of Review to be Determined

6.1 Proposed new house including upgrading of access and formation of service layby on Land 65M NE of Kerrowdown Cottage, Drumnadrochit - Mr David Fraser, 16/04227/PIP, 17/00009/RBREF (RB-17-17)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 17/00009/RBREF for a new house including upgrading of access and formation of service layby on Land 65M NE of Kerrowdown Cottage, Drumnadrochit for Mr David Fraser.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and her advice with regard to the way the Review should be determined (item 4 above refers), the Review Body discussed whether its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Members’ USB Flash Drives, no further procedure having been requested by the applicants.

Members requested sight of Google Earth and Streetview to inform their understanding of the application site. The Independent Planning Adviser provided this.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork and the Google Earth presentation, the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.

In response to a question, the Independent Planning Adviser confirmed that as the application site was within an area of hinterland, it was for the Review Body to determine whether the proposed development met any exceptions to Policy 35 (Housing in the Countryside) of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan.

During discussion, Members were of the view that whilst the application had been refused by the case officer on the grounds that insufficient information had been submitted to enable its determination, in particular with regard to flooding, the proposed development did not meet any of the exceptions contained within Policy 35 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan.

The Review Body DISMISSED the Notice of Review on the grounds that the proposed development was contrary to Policy 35 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan as the application site was within the hinterland but the proposed development did not meet any of the exceptions contained within the policy.

6.2 Erection of house in garden ground on Land 15M SW Of, 17 Oak Avenue, Inverness – Mr A Taylor, 16/04344/FUL, 17/00015/RBREF (RB-18-17)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 17/00015/RBREF for the erection of a house in garden ground on Land 15M SW Of, 17 Oak Avenue, Inverness for Mr A Taylor.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and her 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 Members’ USB Flash Drives, no further procedure having been requested by the applicant.

Members requested sight of Google Earth and Streetview to inform their understanding of the application site. The Independent Planning Adviser provided this.

Prior to determination of the application, the Clerk confirmed that a copy of the planning officer’s response to the Notice of Review – which response went beyond responding to new information submitted with the Notice of Review - had been circulated to Members and that it was for the Planning Review Body to determine whether or not to accept this response prior to determining the Notice of Review. The Review Body unanimously AGREED to accept the planning officer’s response but only insofar as it responded to the new information submitted with the Notice of Review.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork and the Google Earth presentation, the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.

During discussion, Members were of the view that the proposed development represented over-development within a constrained site and would have a significant detrimental impact on the surrounding local amenity.

The Review Body DISMISSED the Notice of Review on the grounds as set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice with the exception of the deletion of “overshadowing by the tree” from reason 1, as this tree had now been felled.

6.3 Change of Use from 2 Shops to 2 houses (1 and 2 bedroom Apartments) at Ashdown, Main Street, Newtonmore, PH20 1DN – Mr Brian Reid, 16/01436/FUL, 17/00016/RBREF (RB-19-17)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 17/00016/RBREF for a change of use from 2 Shops to 2 houses (1 and 2 bedroom Apartments) at Ashdown, Main Street, Newtonmore, PH20 1DN for Mr Brian Reid.

Preliminaries

Having NOTED the Clerk’s confirmation that this was a valid and competent Notice of Review, and her advice with regard to the way the Review should be determined (item 4 above refers), the Review Body discussed whether its requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Members’ USB Flash Drives, no further procedure having been requested by the applicant.

Members requested sight of Google Earth and Streetview to inform their understanding of the application site. The Independent Planning Adviser provided this.

The Chair confirmed that as the application was within the Cairngorms National Park Authority Area, the Notice of Review was to be determined using the Park’s Local Development Plan criteria, extracts of which were contained in the papers.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork and the Google Earth presentation, the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.

During discussion, Members were of the view that:-

whilst the applicant had not sought the services of a letting agent to lease the property, this was deemed to be cost prohibitive and that the applicant had demonstrated attempts to lease the retail units out through alternative methods including advertising locally and on the internet;
the potential loss of two birch trees, which were a typically short-lived species, to the rear of the property was an acceptable sacrifice in order to improve the amenity and appearance of the surrounding area;
the proposed design was sympathetic to the traditional pattern and character of the existing property; and
the proposed change of use from a business premises to a residential property would not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area as there was currently a mix of both residential and business premises on the Main Street in Newtonmore.

The Review Body APPROVED the Notice of Review, subject to conditions to be delegated to the Independent Planning Adviser and the Clerk in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair, on the grounds that:-

The proposal, if implemented, would not result in a development which would appear incongruous. The lack of rear curtilage was not considered to be out of keeping with surrounding development in Newtonmore and therefore complied with Policy 1 (New Housing Development) of the Cairngorms National Park Local Development Plan.
The applicant had provided sufficient supporting information to show compliance with Policy 2 (Supporting Economic Growth) of the Cairngorms National Park Local Development Plan.
The proposal, if implemented, would result in a development that was sympathetic to the traditional pattern and character of the existing property and surrounding area, and as such complied with Policy 3 (Sustainable Design) of the Cairngorms National Park Local Development Plan.

Valedictory

As this was the last meeting prior to the end of the current Council, the Chair, on behalf of the Review Body, thanked officers for their advice and support during her time as Chair and thanked her fellow members of the Review Body for their contributions to meetings.

The meeting ended at 12.05 p.m.

Read the Agenda