Issue - meetings

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and introductions were made.  He outlined the procedure that would be followed and the Head of Governance and Law identified those who wished to speak.  The Head of Governance and Law advised that Councillor Maurice Corry who supported this application was unable to attend the hearing but had asked that a representation from him be read out at the Hearing.  The Chair agreed that this would be read out when other representations were heard from the Supporters present.

PLANNING

Howard Young presented the application on behalf of the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services.  He advised that two applications were presented to the PPSL in September 2014 in respect of this development.  The first application was for the erection of 3 dwelling houses and the formation of a vehicular access on land east of Shira Lodge and was submitted jointly by Houses for Heroes Scotland and the Chrystal Trust.  He confirmed that Houses for Heroes Scotland are a registered charity that provides low cost rented accommodation to house, for life, physically and psychologically disabled ex-Service personnel and their families in Scotland.  Chrystal Trust are the landowner and have offered the land at Cardross and wished to see a legacy born out of their ancestor Lt George Chrystal, heir to Bloomhill Estate, who was killed at the Second Battle of Ypres in 2015.

Mr Young referred to the presentation given at the September meeting of the PPSL.  On a slide he highlighted the settlement area in pink and stated that the vast majority of the development site was in the Greenbelt zone.  On a further slide he pointed out housing allocations in the emerging Local Development Plan for Cardross.  He then referred to the proposed site plan which showed the layout of the development.  He confirmed that two trees at the front were proposed to be removed with the majority of the other trees retained.  He also referred to the proposed elevations and to a series of photographs which showed the listed wall, the property access, the Category B listed building to the North (Bloomhill House), the Category C listed building to the West (Shira Lodge), the Category B listed Old Parish Church and the graveyard which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Mr Young advised that in terms of statutory consultees, representations were received from Roads, Cardross Community Council and West of Scotland Archaeology Service.  He confirmed that Roads had no objections subject to conditions.  He advised that an objection had been received from Cardross Community Council and that they were present at the hearing to speak further on their objection.  He stated that West of Scotland Archaeology had expressed concerns about the impact of the proposal on the adjoining listed buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monument.   He advised that they had, however, no objection subject to conditions.

He confirmed that Planning had received a considerable number of representations both for and against the proposal and that these were listed in the original report of handling and supplementary reports 1 and 2.  In addition to these he advised of further representations received since publication of the reports as follows:-

Supporters - Michael Knox, James Murray, Betty Rhodick on behalf of The Lochgilphead Armed Forces Committee and Ann Hamilton

Objectors to both applications - Elizabeth Murphy, Leslie J Hope & Rosemary A Hope, Meriel Bryson, James Reilly and John Monaghan

Objectors 14/01724/PP - Councillor G Blair, Householder (couldn’t read signature) 7 Ardenvohr, Main Road, Cardross, Elizabeth Hendry, Grace Duncan, Archie Westwood x 2, Ewan Hamilton, Mary Mackay, S Douglas, Lorna Muir, Karen Muir, Isabel Muir, Neil F Mills, John Pollock, Irene Caldwell, Marjorie M Thomas

M McNeill, William J Derries, Catherine Derries, K J Mills, Julie E Song, Carolyn Craig, S Elliott, Moray Elliot, Elizabeth Wilson, William Wilson, E Szymkowiak, Dr Robert Bray, Gustav Jahoda, E Margaret MacGillivray, S Millar, Heather M Denny

Francine Ewen, David Burns, Katie MacDonald, Alexander S Francis, Ann Craig, Joscelin Craig, Rebecca Craig, Abigail Craig, Kenneth Craig, Sheila I McGowan, J Whitelaw, David Lockhart, P McDaid and Kirsteen Exley

He confirmed that all planning applications received had to be assessed in terms of Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act which establishes that determination of a planning application shall be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.  In this case the key policy was the Greenbelt and he referred to a Greenbelt study carried out by the Council in 2010 which determined that this site met the core values of the Greenbelt with high landscape sensitivity, with a high value and high susceptibility to development.

He referred to the proposed Local Development Plan and to an outstanding representation with regard to this site which will be considered by the Reporter.  He advised that notwithstanding the deliberations of the Reporter both the adopted Local Plan and the proposed Local Development Plan identified a number of other areas for housing.  He advised that there was no justification for departing from Local Plan policy in this case.  He also advised of his concerns regarding the design of the development and the proposed new access to the site which would result in the loss of 10 metres of a listed boundary wall.  He also considered that the development would undermine the setting of Cardross Old Parish Church and churchyard and would have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation area contrary to development plan policy and that he recommended refusal of the application for the reasons given in the report of handling.

APPLICANT

Peter Minshall advised that he, along with his colleagues Colin Donald and Paul Houghton, wished to highlight a number of matters in terms of the proposal including:- the reason why the proposal was being taking forward now; why only this site was available; why this proposal could be accepted; why  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3