Minutes of Meeting of the Planning Review Body held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Thursday 21 June 2012 at 10.30 am.
Present:
Mrs I Campbell
Mr N Donald
Mr D Fallows
Mr G Farlow
Mrs I McCallum
Mr T Prag
Mr M Rattray
Mr R Saxon
Dr A Sinclair
In Attendance:
Mr D Jones, Planning Adviser (Items 5.1 – 5.2)
Mr A Todd, Planning Adviser (Items 4.1, 5.3 – 5.5)
Mrs K Lyons, Principal Solicitor (Clerk)
Ms A Macrae, Administrator
Mrs T Bangor-Jones, Admin Assistant
Mr T Prag in the Chair.
The Chairman welcomed all parties to the first meeting of the Planning Review Body, following the Council’s elections in May 2012 and 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
There were no apologies for absence.
2. Declarations of Interest
Item 5.2 – Mr T Prag and Mr N Donald
Items 5.3 and 5.4 – Mr M Rattray
3. Minutes of Meeting of 28 March 2012
The Minutes of Meeting of 28 March 2012, copies of which had been circulated with the agenda, were APPROVED by those members of the Review Body that attended the said Meeting.
4. Notices of Review Previously Considered
4.1 Extension to the Existing Forss Wind Farm including 5 Wind Turbines with a Maximum Tip Height of 81m, up to 3.6km of New and Upgraded Access Tracks, a Substation and Switchgear Building and Compound, 2 Temporary Meteorological Masts and 2 Temporary Construction Compounds and Access at Part Former US Naval Site at Forss and Part Agricultural Land at Borrowston Farm, Caithness for RES UK and Ireland Ltd 12-00002-Forss
There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 12-00002-Forss for the extension to the existing Forss Wind Farm including 5 wind turbines with a maximum tip height of 81m, up to 3.6km of new and upgraded access tracks, a substation and switchgear building and compound, 2 temporary meteorological masts and 2 temporary construction compounds and access at part former US Naval Site at Forss and part agricultural land at Borrowston Farm, Caithness for RES UK and Ireland Ltd 12-00002-Forss.
It was confirmed that the Planning Review Body (PRB) had agreed at its meeting on 13 June 2012 to hold a site visit for this Notice of Review. It was also confirmed that the applicant has also requested that the Notice of Review be determined following a hearing.
The Clerk advised that the PRB must therefore decide whether it had sufficient information in order to determine the Notice of Review following the site visit or whether further information was required. The Clerk also outlined the specific criteria for holding a hearing as set out in the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure)(Scotland) Regulations 2008. She advised that if the PRB decided that further information was required and if that information would best be obtained at a hearing, it must identify what information it required and which party was to provide this information at the hearing. It should also indicate which other parties should attend the hearing.
Following discussion the PRB AGREED that; (i) further information in the form of a desk top assessment of the noise impacts associated with the development be provided by way of a written submission by the relevant Council TEC Services officials; and (ii) there was no requirement to obtain any further information by way of a hearing.
Thereafter the PRB further AGREED that; (i) arrangements be made for a site visit be held on 19 July 2012 and for the Notice of Review to be determined immediately thereafter at a meeting to be held at the North Highland College, Thurso; and (ii) the potential for the meeting to be webcast be further investigated.
5. New Notices of Review to be Determined
The Clerk confirmed that in terms of the procedure the Notices of Review listed at items 5.1 to 5.5 were competent. She also indicated that there would be no overhead presentation of the photographs and maps, as had been the case with the previous Review Body, on the basis that this information was already contained in the individual booklets circulated with the Planning Review Body agenda papers and that this would save a significant amount of resources and time.
In discussion Members referred to the importance of good quality visuals in assisting Members understanding of the Notice of Review and reducing the requirement for site visits. In this regard it was noted that some of the photographs within the PRB Booklets were not annotated with a description of the location as had been provided on previous photographic presentations to the Review Body.
The Clerk explained that the Review Body relied on the information supplied by the different parties involved in the Notice of Review and therefore there was a variation in the quality of material provided which in some cases had resulted in the Review Body officials having to interpret the information and fill in any gaps. However she indicated that all possible efforts would be made as early as possible in the process to identify where gaps may exist to ensure the material provided to Members was as complete as possible.
5.1 Renewal of Consent 08/00064/OUTNA at Seaforth, Lochloy Road, Nairn for Mrs Mary Pritchard 12-00007-Seaforth (RB-10-12)
There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 12-00007-Seaforth for the renewal of consent 08/00064/OUTNA at Seaforth, Lochloy Road, Nairn for Mrs Mary Pritchard.
The Planning Review Body AGREED that their requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet B of the Planning Review Body agenda papers.
The Clerk reported that the recently adopted Highland Wide Local Development Plan had superseded (1) the Highland Structure Plan for all areas with the exception of that area covered by the Cairngorms National Park and (2) the individual Local Plans with the exception of those parts of the Local Plans continued in force by The Town and Country Planning (Continuation in Force of Local Plans) (Highland) (Scotland) Order 2012. She indicated that while the Notices of Review to be considered below pre-dated the adoption of the Plan any reasons for dismissing a Notice of Review would have to be updated to reflect the terms of the new Highland Wide Local Development Plan.
Debate and Decision
Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body (PRB) discussed the Notice of Review. The Planning Adviser indicated that the applicant’s agent had made an error in submitting an ‘in principle’ application following the decision of the Reporter to uphold the appeal against refusal of outline permission for the development. However he advised that the application could be considered as a full application taking into account that detailed plans had been submitted and the application accorded with the Reporter’s findings. The PRB suggested that if the correct detailed application had been submitted following the Reporter’s decision then the development would have been granted full planning permission. It was also suggested that the proposal accorded with the Reporter’s findings with regard to the design and siting of the house. The Planning Adviser indicated that if the PRB were minded to uphold the Notice of Review then Condition 9 which referred to boundary details be amended to reflect the Reporter’s findings and the reasons for the condition amended to refer to amenity and privacy. He also recommended that the PRB consider imposing an additional condition removing permitted development rights having regard to the size and location of the plot and Reporter’s findings.
The PRB UPHELD the Notice of Review subject to the conditions set out on pages 38 and 39 of Booklet B of the agenda papers, subject to Condition 9 being amended to reflect the Reporter’s finding with regard to the boundary details for reasons of privacy and amenity, and an additional condition to be included with regard to the removal of permitted development rights.
5.2 Serviced House Plot at West Lodge, 70 Culduthel Park, Inverness for Mr J Johnstone 12-0008-Culduthel (RB-11-12)
Mr N Donald declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that he was one of the local Members for Ward 16, Inverness Ness-side and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review. Mr Donald left the Chamber for the determination of this item.
Mr T Prag declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that he knew one of the objectors, although not on a personal basis. However having applied the test outlined in Paragraph 5.18 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that his interest did not preclude his involvement in the discussion (and voting).
There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 12-00008-Culduthel for serviced house plot at West Lodge, 70 Culduthel Park, Inverness for Mr J Johnstone.
The Planning Review Body AGREED that their requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet C of the Planning Review Body agenda papers.
Debate and Decision
Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body (PRB) discussed the Notice of Review. Responding to questions the Planning Adviser indicated that in determining whether the tree preservation order for the single tree located on the site should be overturned the PRB should consider the contribution the tree made to the wider area and whether there would be appropriate mitigation in terms of replanting. He also clarified that any economic impacts should not be given significant weight. In discussion Members expressed the view that development accorded with policy on the grounds that the single tree on the site was not an exemplar of the species and that its removal would not have an adverse impact on the character of the area nor set a precedent for the removal of other trees in the area. It was also noted that appropriate mitigation would be put in place on the basis that the applicant was willing to undertake replacement tree planting to compensate for the loss of the tree.
The PRB therefore UPHELD the Notice of Review subject to the conditions set out on pages 76, 77 and 78 of Booklet C of the agenda papers.
Mr N Donald returned to the meeting at this point.
5.3 Development of Two Serviced House Plots and Shared Access Road at Badachonacher House, Newmore, Invergordon for Mr E Maclellan 12-0009-Maclellan
Mr M Rattray declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that he was one of the local Members for Ward 7, Cromarty Firth, and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review. Mr Rattray left the Chamber for the determination of this item.
There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 12-0009-Maclellan for the development of two serviced house plots and shared access road at Badachonacher House, Newmore, Invergordon for Mr E Maclellan 12-0009-Maclellan.
The Planning Review Body AGREED that their requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet D of the Planning Review Body agenda papers.
Debate and Decision
Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body (PRB) discussed the Notice of Review. A number of Members suggested that the development would not round off or consolidate the existing housing group reference being made to the distance between the existing group and the house at ‘Claymore’. It was suggested that approval would perpetuate ribbon development in the area, make further applications to the north of ‘Claymore’ more difficult to resist and result in the loss of agricultural land. A contrary view was expressed that the proposal represented appropriate infill development in the area and would consolidate and round off the existing group in the area in accordance with policy.
Mrs I McCallum seconded by Mrs I Campbell moved that the Notice of Review be UPHELD on the grounds that the development would consolidate and round off the existing housing group in accordance with policy.
The Chairman seconded by Mr G Farlow moved as an amendment that the Notice of Review be DISMISSED for the reasons set out in the appointed officer’s Decision Notice, subject to the policy references being updated to reflect the adoption of the Highland Wide Local Development Plan, and an additional reason relating to the loss of agricultural land.
There being no further amendments, the matter was put to the vote with votes being cast as follows:
Motion (4): Mrs I Campbell, Mr D Fallows; Mrs I McCallum and Mr R Saxon
Amendment (4): Mr N Donald, Mr G Farlow, Mr T Prag and Dr A Sinclair
On an equality of votes been cast between the MOTION and AMENDMENT the Chairman cast his second and determining vote in favour of the AMENDMENT.
The AMENDMENT to DISMISS the Notice of Review for the reasons set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice, subject to the policy references being updated to reflect the terms of the new Highland Wide Local Development Plan, and an additional reason relating to the loss of agricultural land, accordingly became the finding of the meeting.
5.4 Erection of House at Land 60m West of Upper Achandunie, Ardross for Mr W Macphee 12-00011-Macphee
Mr M Rattray declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds that he was one of the local Members for Ward 7, Cromarty Firth, and therefore not permitted to participate in the determination of the Notice of Review. Mr Rattray was not present in Chamber for the determination of this item.
There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 12-00011-MacPhee for the erection of house at land 60m West of Upper Achandunie, Ardross for Mr W Macphee.
The Planning Review Body AGREED that their requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet E of the Planning Review Body agenda papers.
Debate and Decision
Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body (PRB) discussed the Notice of Review. In discussion Members of the PRB expressed the view that the site was not garden ground. The Planning Adviser clarified that on page 61 (para 8.5) of the PRB agenda papers the applicant had appeared to accept that the site could not be considered as garden ground and that his justification for the development was that it would fit into the definition of a housing group. During further discussion a number of Members took the view that the development would not respect the character of the existing housing group and that approval may lead to further applications in the area. Reference was also made to the advice from the Council’s TEC Services that the application be refused on the grounds of the roads infrastructure in the area and uncertainty as to whether the road could be brought up to adoptive standards. A contrary view was expressed that the development would consolidate and round off the existing housing group in accordance with policy.
The Chairman seconded by Mr N Donald moved that the Notice of Review be DISMISSED for the reasons set out in the appointed officer’s Decision Notice, subject to the policy references being updated to reflect the terms of the new Highland Wide Local Development Plan and the relevant TECS Guidance.
Dr A Sinclair seconded by Mrs I Campbell moved as an amendment that the Notice of Review be UPHELD on the grounds that the development would round off and consolidate the existing housing group and therefore accorded with policy.
There being no further amendments, the matter was put to the vote with votes being cast as follows:
Motion (5): Mr N Donald, Mr D Fallows, Mr G Farlow, Mr T Prag, and Mr R Saxon
Amendment (3): Mrs I Campbell, Mrs I McCallum and Dr A Sinclair
The MOTION to DISMISS the Notice of Review for the reasons set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice, subject to the policy references being updated to reflect the terms of the new Highland Wide Local Development Plan and the relevant TECS Guidance.
Mr M Rattray returned to the meeting at this point.
5.5 Erection of a Dwellinghouse at Site 3, Fiddlers Park, Lochbay, Waternish, Isle of Skye for Chantal Macleod 12-00013-Macleod
There had been circulated Notice of Review No. 12-00013-Macleod for the erection of a dwellinghouse at Site 3, Fiddlers Park, Lochbay, Waternish, Isle of Skye for Chantal Macleod.
The Planning Review Body AGREED that their requirement for information had been satisfied by the Notice of Review documentation contained in Booklet F of the Planning Review Body agenda papers.
Debate and Decision
Having considered the supporting paperwork the Planning Review Body (PRB) discussed the Notice of Review. The PRB indicated their agreement with the terms of the Crofters Commission’s objection to the proposal on the grounds that the development would result in the loss of high quality croft land. The PRB also indicated their agreement with the appointed officer’s assessment of the application that the development would result in overdevelopment out of keeping with the settlement pattern in the area.
The PRB therefore DISMISSED the Notice of Review for the reasons set out in the appointed officer’s decision notice, subject to the policy references being updated to reflect the terms of the new Highland Wide Local Development Plan.
The meeting closed at 11.55am.