Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest intimated.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and advised that no person present would be entitled to speak other than the Members of the Local Review Body (LRB) and Mr Reppke who would provide procedural advice when required.

 

The Chair advised that his first task would be to establish whether or not the Panel felt they had sufficient information before them to determine the review. 

 

Councillor Currie reported that he did not feel he had sufficient information to make a decision on this review. He advised that he did not understand why no location plans or photo montages had been included in the paperwork.

 

Councillor MacIntyre advised that he felt he had a enough information to make a decision however advised that that he could understand Councillor Currie’s point of view.

 

Councillor McNaughton reported that he also felt that he had sufficient information to make a decision today however advised that he would be happy to take this review further if Councillor Currie did not feel happy enough to make a decision today. Councillor McNaughton asked if Councillor Currie could explain the reasoning behind his view.

 

Councillor Currie advised that he had some difficulty with this application  when he is unsure as to the location of the site.

 

The Chair advised Councillor Currie, that his options would either be to request further information, in the form of photo montages or a location plan or to go on a site visit.

 

Councillor Currie advised that maps and photo montages would have  been of help and that he would of expected these to be included in the paperwork for all cases for review.  Mr Reppke explained the process for the provision of information to the LRB.

 

Mr Reppke also drew the attention of the LRB to Page 21 of the Agenda Pack, which states that the applicant had not provided photo montages that compiled with Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Guidance, and suggested this maybe a reason as to why they were not included in the pack for members.

 

Councillor McNaughton then directed Councillor Currie to the reasons for refusal and suggested that there were issues that in his view were strong reasons for refusal that could be clearly considered from the papers submitted to the LRB.

 

Councillor Currie noted the comments of the Chair and it was agreed there was sufficient information to determine the application.

 

Councillor McNaughton advised that in his opinion he felt that the applicant had submitted very little information to support his case when submitting the planning application . He advised that he agreed with the reasons for refusal of the  application

on the basis that (1) the development by virtue of its local scale and design will appear as a prominent and incongruous element which will dominate the landscape and be out of keeping with the existing characteristics of the landscape (2) the proposed site would be contrary to the guidance in the LWECS and would be visibly intrusive  and dominating in the complex landscape that exists in these low lying hills and (3) as the applicant had failed to submit photomontages and view points to allow the visual impact to be fully assessed, SNH agreed with the Planners and he felt that the application was  lacking in the necessary detail as it has not been carried out in accordance with the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Guidance.

 

Councillor MacIntyre reported that he would also support the reasons for refusal. He advised that in his opinion the application is in the wrong location.

 

Councillor Currie advised that having heard the views of his colleagues he would also agree with the reasons for refusal on the basis that there had been insufficient evidence to allow him to be assured that there would not be an adverse visual impact on the area from the development.

 

Decision

 

The Argyll and Bute Local Review Body agreed unanimously to refuse the request for review on the grounds that they agreed with the reasons for refusal given by the Planning Authority on the basis that:

 

(1)   The development by virtue of its local scale and design will appear as a prominent and incongruous element which will dominate the landscape and be out of keeping with the existing characteristics of the landscape.

 

(2)   The proposed site would be contrary to the guidance in the LWECS and would be visibly intrusive  and dominating in the complex landscape that exists in these low lying hills .

 

 

(3)   The applicant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their case.