Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were intimated from Councillors Gordon Chalmers, Rory Colville, Robin Currie, Vivien Dance, David Kinniburgh, Donald MacMillan, Alex McNaughton and James McQueen.

None declared.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

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

Mr Charles Reppke, Head of Governance and Law outlined the hearing procedure and invited anyone who wished to speak at the meeting to identify themselves and once that process had been completed the Chair invited the Planning Department to set out their recommendations.

PLANNING AUTHORITY

Mr Stephen Fair presented the case on behalf of the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services.  He advised that the planning application was for the erection of a 1¾ storey flatted development plus 2 storey wings with 5 flats in total on land situated east of Hawthorn Edge, North Connel, Oban and that the Committee had agreed to hold this hearing due to the number of representations received and confirmed that 31 letters/emails had been received from 26 individual objectors and that these included representations from the Community Council and 2 Councillors.  He advised of the concerns raised by the objectors which were detailed in his report.  He confirmed that the site had been viewed by Members and he highlighted various aspects of the proposed development on a number of site and location plans.  In Policy terms he advised that the vast majority of the proposed development was within the settlement area of the local Development Plan and pointed out on the site plan the areas where the site encroached on the ‘Countryside Around Settlement’ area of the local Development Plan.  He advised that the encroachment to the east included an existing access so did not consider it a loss to meaningful countryside.  He advised that it was considered that the proposal could be accepted as a justified ‘minor departure’ to the provisions of the approved Development Plan in this regard.  He stated that in his opinion there were no other material considerations, including the views expressed by third parties, which would warrant the refusal of planning permission.  He referred to objectors’ concerns about overdevelopment and confirmed that he had undertaken a comparative study of the proposed development against adjacent neighbouring properties.  He confirmed that the development site measured approximately 2054 square metres with the actual ground floor area of the proposed flatted development measuring approximately 309 square metres which meant the proposal only occupied 15% of the application site.  Referring to Appendix A: Sustainable Siting and Design Principles, Design of New Housing in Settlements, Open Space/Density which states “all development……should only occupy a maximum of 33% of their site…” he concluded that the proposal did not constitute overdevelopment of the application site.  He advised that in respect of the adjacent neighbouring properties the Hawthorn Edge site measured approximately 1225 square metres with the actual ground floor measuring 150 square metres which equated to 12% of the plot area ratio.  He stated that the Tiroran site measured 1626 square metres with the actual ground floor measuring160 square metres  which was 10% of the plot area ratio and that the Taliskar site measured 1468 square metres with the actual ground floor measuring 210 square metres which was 14% of the plot area ratio.  He was therefore of the opinion that it accorded with the settlement pattern.  He indicated that the ridge height would be 1 metre higher than Hawthorn Edge but the proposed building was 12 metres from Hawthorn Edge so the difference would be barely perceptible.  It compared well to immediately adjacent housing and the care home and flatted developments within the near vicinity.  He confirmed that other than the Community Council there had been no other statutory consultee objections and therefore he recommended approval of the Planning Application as a justified ‘minor departure’ from Policy subject to the conditions contained in the report.

APPLICANT

Mr Frank Beaton spoke on behalf of the Applicant and reinforced the point that the vast majority of the site lay within the ‘Settlement Zone’.  He advised that the proposed building demonstrated scale and mass appropriate to the surrounding built environment and that the proposal was wholly consistent with Planning Policies and the Argyll and Bute Design Guide and he asked the Committee to grant the application.

STATUTORY CONSULTEES

Mr John Heron, on behalf of the Roads Authority, advised that he did not wish to speak at this time but would respond to any questions that arose later in the process.

Mr Norman Asher, on behalf Ardchattan Community Council, advised that the development was large within the plot of land and that the 3 surrounding houses were single dwellings and that this was for 5 dwellings.  He felt the proposal was not suitable for this location.

OBJECTORS

Mr Allan Macaskill spoke on behalf of a number of objectors and stated that the application had been recommended for approval as a minor departure from the Argyll and Bute Local Plan 2009 and therefore the proposal was not consistent with the Development Plan because part of the development extended into the ‘Countryside Around Settlement’ control zone.  He stated that the development was out of keeping with the location and that a block of 5 flats beside 3 single dwellings houses adjacent to ‘Countryside Around Settlement’ did not fit any good design guide and that the side elevation of Hawthorn Edge to the flats was only 12 metres away.  He referred to a letter by Dr John Raven of Historic Scotland dated 2 February 2011 to Mrs Henderson which stated “I would agree that the proposed development is significantly larger than the existing neighbouring properties”.  He advised that part of the site was within the ‘Settlement Zone’ for North Connel and that an application for a single dwelling house contained wholly within that designated area would fit better into the landscape of that location rather than a large intrusive block of 5 flats.  He quoted the Argyll and Bute Local Plan Written Statement adopted in August 2009 which stated “to encourage development of a scale, form, design and location appropriate to the character of the landscape and settlements of Argyll and Bute” and that it also stated that new development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.