• Agenda

Minutes of Meeting of the Planning Review Body held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 10.30 am.

Present:

Mr T Prag, Mrs I Campbell, Mr D Fallows, Mr G Farlow, Mrs I McCallum, Mr R Saxon, Dr A Sinclair.

In Attendance:

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

Mr T Prag in the Chair (excluding Item 4.6)
Mr G Farlow in the Chair (Item 4.6)

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

Apologies for absence were received from Mr N Donald and Mr M Rattray.

2.  Declarations of Interest

Item 4.2 – Mrs I McCallum (non-financial)
Item 4.6 – Mr T Prag (non-financial)

3.  Minutes of Meetings of 24 and 25 April 2013

The Minutes of Meetings of 24 and 25 April 2013, copies of which had been circulated with the agenda, were APPROVED.

The Independent Planning Advisor advised that much of the Council’s Supplementary Guidance, including “Housing in the Countryside and Siting and Design,” had in recent months been formally adopted by the Council and therefore carried statutory weight.  Where reports used the term “Interim Supplementary Guidance”, this indicated that the report had been written prior to Supplementary Guidance being formally adopted.  Members should afford statutory weight to Supplementary Guidance which had been formally adopted, notwithstanding that the term “Interim” might be used in reports.

The Review Body NOTED the position.

4.  New Notices of Review to be Determined

In accordance with Standing Order 18, with the consent of the meeting, Item 4.5 on the agenda was taken first.  The Review Body also NOTED that the item numbering in the printed agenda should read 4.1, 4.2, etc., rather than 5.1, 5.2, etc.

4.5 Erection of single wind turbine up to 78 metres to blade tip and ancillary equipment, Land 950M West Of Windmill Cottage Stanstill Bower , Thura Mains Farm, Thura Mains, Bower, Wick – Mackay, 13-00016 (RB-27-13)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 13-00016-Mackay for erection of a single wind turbine up to 78 metres to blade tip and ancillary equipment at land 950M West Of Windmill Cottage Stanstill Bower, Thura Mains Farm, Thura Mains, Bower, Wick, KW1 4TP, for Mr Mackay.

The Review Body AGREED to DEFER consideration of the Notice of Review to the next appropriate meeting of the Planning Review Body to allow a site visit to take place.  There was no discussion of the Notice of Review.

4.1 Erection of House on Land East of North House, Farr, Inverness – Blithe Properties, 13/00008/RBREF (RB-23-13)

There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 13-00008-Blithe Properties for erection of a house on land East of North House, Farr Inverness.

 Preliminaries

The Clerk confirmed that this was a competent Notice of Review and, following clarification, 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.  The Clerk explained that, for this application, Members, taking account of the documents lodged by the applicant and interested parties, needed to decide whether the application accorded with or was contrary to the development plan, and, thereafter, to decide whether the weight attached to relevant material considerations added to or outweighed the Review Body’s assessment of the application against the development plan.

Debate and Decision 

 Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.  Differing views were expressed, including, on the one hand: that the proposed building would be detrimental to the character of the settlement, either by being too close to one of the two Gatehouses, which were of architectural merit and should be protected, or too close to another building currently under construction; the proposals were also not in keeping with the predominant housing style; and, on the other hand: that the proposed building would be acceptable as in-fill, as long as planning conditions were imposed to site the building away from the North Gatehouse; the settlement pattern was of housing of mixed size – a small house would not be out of place.

Mr R Saxon, seconded by Mr D Fallows moved that the Notice of Review be upheld on the grounds that the proposal was not contrary to the Highland-wide Local Development Plan policies 28 and 35, and to the Council’s Supplementary Guidance, “Housing in the Countryside and Siting and Design,” in that the site reflected and respected the character, cohesiveness, spacing and amenity of the existing group and the individual houses within the group; subject to conditions to be agreed with the Planning Adviser and Chair, in particular with regard to siting and size.  As an amendment, the Chairman, seconded by Mr G Farlow, moved that the Notice of Review be dismissedfor the reasons given by the appointed officer by way of the original decision notice.

There being no further amendments, the matter was put to the vote with votes being cast as follows:

Motion (3): Mr R Saxon, Mr D Fallows and Mrs I Campbell

Amendment (3): Mr T Prag, Mr G Farlow and Dr A Sinclair

Abstentions (1): Mrs I McCallum

There being an equality of votes, the Chairman gave the casting vote in favour of the Amendment.

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

4.2 Erection of House on Land West of Old Post Office, Knockbain, Munlochy - Mackenzie, 13-00012 (RB-24-13)

Declaration of Interest:

Mrs I McCallum declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that she was one of the local Members for Ward 10, Black Isle, and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review.  Mrs McCallum left the Chamber for the duration of this item. 

There had been circulated Notice of Review 13-00012-Mackenzie for erection of a house on land West of Old Post Office, Knockbain, Munlochy, for Mr J Mackenzie.

Preliminaries

The Clerk confirmed that this was a competent Notice of Review and, following clarification, 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.  The Clerk explained that, for this application, Members, taking account of the documents lodged by the applicant and interested parties, needed to decide whether the application accorded with or was contrary to the development plan, and, thereafter, to decide whether the weight attached to relevant material considerations added to or outweighed the Review Body’s assessment of the application against the development plan.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.  Members were of the view that the key consideration was whether or not the proposed house could be seen as being part of a housing group.  The site did not qualify as brownfield as the land had not been degraded to the point where it could not be used; nor did the site qualify as garden ground as defined in the Council’s Supplementary Guidance. 

Following discussion, the Review Body DISMISSED the Notice of Review on the grounds as set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice, noting that the Interim Supplementary Guidance referred to in the Planning Officer’s Case Handling Report had now been formally adopted.  (Item 3 above refers).

4.3 Erection of House on Land 75m West of Tigh Litnchean, Dalchreichart – Turnbull, 13-00013 (RB-25-13)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 13-00013-Turnbull for erection of a house on Land 75m West of Tigh Litnchean, Dalchreichart.  The Review Body NOTED a technical correction to the report, in that the description of the location should read, “wooded glen” rather than, “narrow wooded glen.”

Preliminaries

The Clerk confirmed that this was a competent Notice of Review.  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.

Debate and Decision

Having considered the supporting paperwork, the Planning Review Body discussed the Notice of Review.  Whilst some reservation was expressed as to potential impact on visual amenity, given that the A87 was a major tourist route, in general Members considered that the development would not be much seen from the main road, and, as there were already houses on both sides of the track and multiple layers of housing on the hillside, it would blend in with the existing settlement pattern.  The vitality of the settlement was encouraging.

The Review Body UPHELD the Notice of Review on the grounds that the proposal would not be contrary to Policies 28, 29 and 36 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan, as it would not be in conflict with the existing housing pattern, nor unduly detrimental to visual amenity; and AGREED that powers be delegated to the Planning Adviser, in consultation with the Chairman, to impose planning conditions and reasons as appropriate, paying particular attention to the siting of the house.

4.4 Change of use from class 5 industrial to waste transfer station class 5/6 and erection of Portacabin, 12 Lotland Street, Inverness – HRL Scrap & Waste Solutions Ltd, 13-00015 (RB-26-13)

There had been circulated Notice of Review 13-00015-HRL Scrap & Waste Solutions Ltd for an application of change of use from class 5 industrial to waste transfer station class 5/6 and erection of Portacabin.

Preliminaries

The Clerk confirmed that this was a competent Notice of Review and explained that, for this application, Members, taking account of the documents lodged by the applicant and interested parties, needed to decide whether the application accorded with or was contrary to the development plan, and, thereafter, to decide whether the weight attached to relevant material considerations added to or outweighed the Review Body’s assessment of the application against the development plan.  He also explained that, should the Review Body decide to uphold the appeal, the application would need to be passed to Scottish Ministers, because of the objection by the Health and Safety Executive due to Health and Safety rules relating to business operations near to oil depots. 

In response to questions, further information regarding the Health and Safety position was provided to Members.  Members were also advised that, should the Review Body uphold the Notice of Review, subject to planning conditions as suggested by the Health and Safety Executive, it would fall to the Planning Service to ensure that those conditions were complied with.  As the conditions would relate to the numbers of people working at the business and the hours they worked, this would be difficult to do.

In discussion, Members commented that where a response from the Health and Safety Executive was to refuse an application, planning permission would not normally be given.  However, evidence as to whether the applicant would be able to comply with the Health and Safety Executive’s suggested conditions had not been provided and a fully informed decision could not be reached without this.

The Review Body AGREED to DEFER consideration of the Notice of Review to the next appropriate meeting of the Planning Review Body to allow the following information to be provided by the applicant:

a) how many people worked at the current business, and for how many hours
    per day;
b) how many people would work at the proposed business, and for how many
    hours per day; and
c) whether the new business would be able to comply with the Health and
    Safety Executive’s suggested conditions that no more than 3 people be on
    site at any one time, and that the total time which people were present on
    site did not exceed 2 hours in any 24 hour period.

The Review Body NOTED that, as some discussion of the Notice of Review had taken place, only those Members present during this item would be able to participate when the Notice of Review was brought back to the Committee.

4.6 Erection of 2.5 storey extension to side and rear of existing house, 38 Cedarwood Drive, Milton of Leys , Inverness – Richmond, 13-00017 (RB-28-13)

Declaration of Interest:

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.

Mr G Farlow took the chair for this item.  The meeting adjourned for approximately five minutes to allow the Clerk to brief Mr Farlow as to the material considerations relating to this item.

There had been circulated Notice of Review 13-00017-Richmond for erection of 2.5 storey extension to side and rear of existing house at 38 Cedarwood Drive, Milton of Leys, Inverness for Mr and Mrs Richmond.

Preliminaries

The Clerk confirmed that this was a competent Notice of Review. 

Members being of the view that they did not have enough information, the Review Body AGREED to DEFER consideration of the Notice of Review to the next appropriate meeting of the Planning Review Body to allow the following to be provided:

a) by the applicant and the Planning Officer: photographs of the site showing
    how it related to the surrounding area, adjacent properties, the Distributor
    Road to the A9 and illustrating the size of the garden ground; and
b) by the Planning Officer: clarification as to whether the application was for a
    house or an extension, and whether the property was detached or semi-
    detached.

The meeting ended at 11.50 a.m.