Agenda and minutes

Apologies were intimated from Councillor Colville, Councillor Currie and Councillor Devon.

There were no Declarations of Interest.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and general introductions were made.

Charles Reppke, Head of Governance and Law, advised that a late representation in support of the application had been received in the form of an email from John Tacchi. This had been distributed to members prior to the commencement of the meeting.

Mr Reppke then outlined the hearing procedure and the Chair invited anyone who wished to speak at the meeting to identify themselves.

Planning Officer

Howard Young, Planning and Regulatory Services, gave a brief outline of the application site which was situated in upper Helensburgh and was within the Conservation Area.  Mr Young advised that he had received a late representation in support of the application from Mr John Tacchi by e-mail.  He also wished to point out that two e-mails received from Mr A McGillvray and Mr A Rodgers, were noted in the report as objections when in fact they were in support of the application. 

Mr Young advised that the applicants had now redesigned the proposed dwellinghouse and that this now complied with the Council’s requirements.  A Power-point presentation showed the amended design and finishes, floor layout and elevations.  Mr Young considered that the design was now satisfactory and modern and would fit well into the area. 

In these respects, Mr Young recommended approval of the application subject to the relevant conditions contained within his report.

Agent for Applicant

Mr Robert Sills introduced himself and gave a brief summary of his professional background, advising that he himself was a local resident having lived a little over 35 years in the Helensburgh area and had an intimate knowledge of the site and surrounding area.  He added that over the years, his practice had been involved in more than two hundred projects in the Helensburgh, Lomond and West Dunbartonshire area and that he had gained a reputation for high quality, innovative design solutions working with both historic and contemporary buildings. Indeed, he had been presented the Helensburgh & Lomond Planning Design award by the Council on several occasions.

Mr Sills then went on to give a brief review and history of the application.  The initial design proposals were formulated following a pre-application consultation with the Planning Officer on site.  This consultation took place between the Planning Office and the applicants on 21 May 2010 and was important to them in so far as it gave them the degree of comfort necessary to enable them to appoint Mr Sills to progress detailed design proposals for their new home with a view to submitting a formal planning application. Mr Sills reminded the committee of the Council’s policy to only accept detailed design proposals in Conservation areas and that this incurred considerable and unrecoverable expense to the applicants.  The Planning Officer’s initial view had been that the site was of an adequate size to accommodate an additional house. He also suggested at that time that the house should be located in a similar position on the site to the one eventually proposed by the architects following their own site survey and analysis.

Prior to the submitting a formal planning application, a full set of design proposals was shown to the same Planning Officer on site on 13 July 2010. His response at that time was positive and his view was that the proposals could be submitted as they stood.  This was done on 30^th of same month.

As part of their Planning Application, Mr Sills advised that a 19 page Design and Access Statement with illustrations and photos was submitted. This included an initial appraisal of the site both within its immediate surroundings and as part of the wider Conservation Area, followed by a detailed explanation of how they proposed reconciling the applicants’ requirements within the constraints imposed by the site.

Following representations received as part of the consultation process, Mr Sills subsequently submitted a further 11page document entitled ‘Response to Representations’ in which they had responded to all of the issues raised.

Both of the above mentioned documents are now available to view on the Council’s website and indeed the Planning Officer’s report and recommendations to Committee makes reference to the main issues referred to in these documents. 

As a result of issues raised as part of the consultation process and to address some of the concerns expressed by the immediate neighbours, a number of significant changes to the proposed design of the house had been made.  These included reducing the overall floor area, length and height of the house, and moving its position on the site.  As a result of these changes, Mr Sills believed that the overall likely visual impact of the house on the site would be reduced and that its relationship with the rear of Dean House and the adjoining property, Sparrowcroft, would be improved.

Whilst finalising the position of the house on the site, privacy issues that may have arisen due to the relative position of the windows in the new house together with those in the adjoining properties, were taken into account.  Having assessed the window positions in accordance with the relevant Scottish Government guidelines, Mr Sills was satisfied that there were no valid privacy issues.

The relative positions of the new house and the adjacent property of Sparrowcroft were assessed with regard to overshadowing.  Mr Sills demonstrated that there would be no significant impact to the daylight or sunlight currently enjoyed by ether Sparrowcroft or to the rear of Dean House.  The size and orientation of the windows of the new house would also ensure that it would enjoy adequate day/sunlight when assessed in accordance with the Building Research Establishment’s guide to good practise with regard to the site layout planning for day/sunlight.

The form of the proposed new building is visually single storey and use of the roof space had been made to provide two small bedrooms and a shower room.  One of these rooms has a dormer window, similar to the haylofts in other coach houses in East Rossdhu Drive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.