Agenda and minutes

The Chair referred to the sudden and sad passing of Councillor Al Reay advising that his death had been a loss to Helensburgh and the Council as Councillor Reay had taken his role as a Councillor very seriously and was always very willing to take an active part when decisions had to be made.

Apologies for absence were intimated from Councillors Gordon Chalmers, David Kinniburgh and Alister MacAlister.

None declared.

(a)   The Minutes of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee of 21 February 2012 were approved as a correct record.

 

(b)   The Minutes of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee of 22 February 2012 (9.30 am) were approved as a correct record.

 

(c)   The Minutes of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee of 21 February 2012 (10.15 am) were approved as a correct record.

 

(d)   The Minutes of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee of 21 February 2012 (11.00 am) were approved as a correct record.

 

(e)   The Minutes of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee of 21 February 2012 (11.45 am) were approved as a correct record.

Report by Regulatory Services Manager

The Council, through its Environmental Health Service, undertakes its statutory duties in terms of the identification of contaminated land, and its remediation, as required.  The principal purpose of the duties is to protect against contamination of human health, watercourses and ecological damage by contaminated land.  The Council is required to produce a written strategy on how it proposes to undertake these duties and undertake a periodic review of its strategy.  A report presenting the Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy for Committee approval was considered.

 

Decision

 

1.        Noted the work undertaken to date and approved the Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy to be implemented by the Regulatory Services Manager; and

 

2.        Agreed to cease the programme of site assessments and to focus on sites identified through development management applications, liaison with other regulators (eg SEPA), developers and intelligence on sites where contamination is suspected or has been found.

 

(Reference: Report by Regulatory Services Manager and Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy dated February 2012, submitted)

Report by Head of Governance and Law

Section 12 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 provides that a council must seek to ensure that fees it charges in respect of taxi and private car hire licences and applications are sufficient to meet expenses it incurs in carrying out its functions in relation to these licences.  The Council agreed at their meeting on 16 February 2012 that fees are increased to those specified in Appendix 1 of a report detailing the position in relation to the renewals of these licences and accessibility and security issues in relation to taxi and private hire cars.

 

Decision

 

1.        Noted the position in relation to the licence fees;

 

2.        Agreed that licences continue to be granted for a three year period for the licences due for renewal in June 2012; and

 

3.        Agreed that consultation take place with the Fleet Management Service of the Council in relation to accessibility issues.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Governance and Law, submitted)

Report by Head of Governance and Law

In terms of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, Section 17, the local authority requires to fix maximum fares and other charges in connection with the hire of taxis operating in their area and to review the scales for these fares and other charges on a regular basis.  At its meeting on 18 January 2012 the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee agreed the present fare structure should remain the same including the charges in respect of soiling, waiting and telephone bookings and yardage distances.  It was also agreed that further review of the fare structure should be undertaken in 18 months as required in terms of the Act.  An advert was placed in the local press during week ending 27 January 2012 detailing the proposals that there would be no amendments to fares for taxis operating within the jurisdiction of Argyll and Bute.  A report advising of representations received regarding these proposals was before the Committee for consideration.

 

Decision

 

1.        Agreed to confirm the Committee’s proposal as agreed on 18 January 2012 that no fare increase will take place and that a review will be undertaken in 18 months time; and

 

2.        Agreed that a report should come back to the PPSL Committee in January 2013 advising on the economic situation at that time so that the Committee can determine whether or not a review of the taxi fares should be undertaken sooner than previously determined.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Governance and Law, submitted)

Report by Head of Governance and Law

Consideration was given to a report advising that the Council’s licensing section have received requests to consider including tuk tuk vehicles and trikes on the list of vehicles approved for use as taxi and private car hires licensed by Argyll and Bute Council.

 

Decision

 

Agreed that no change should be made to the list of Approved Vehicles.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Governance and Law, submitted)

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Committee, on 29 October 2009, agreed to approve this application subject to a Section 75 Agreement.  The Principal Planning Officer spoke to the terms of supplementary planning report number 2 advising of a proposed change to the terms of the Section 75 Agreement associated with this proposal and to further clarify the proposed Heads of Terms of the Section 75 Agreement.  The Applicant has requested that the phasing of points 1 and 2 of the Section 75 Agreement be amended to allow commencement following the development of 20 residential units on the site, or the completion of the ferry terminal whichever is sooner.  The Principal Planning Officer also referred to Scottish Government advice about Section 75 Agreements and to a further supplementary report number 3 which advises of the Roads Officer’s response to a representation received from Councillor Walsh which is referred to in supplementary report number 2.  In light of the Roads Officer’s revised response it is proposed that the recommendation contained in supplementary report number 2 be revised to require the works to be in place prior to the completion of the 11^th unit, or the completion of the ferry terminal, whichever is the sooner rather than the 21^st unit as originally suggested.   It is considered that the proposed change to the phasing is acceptable in terms of road safety and the Road Improvement  Plan further provides clarity on the road widening, footpath and extension to 40 mph limit and this should be used to assist the drafting of the legal agreement.  It is recommended that Members agree to the revised Heads of Terms for the Section 75 Agreement as detailed in supplementary report number 3.

 

Motion

 

1.        To agree to the revised Heads of Terms for the Section 75 Agreement as detailed below:-

 

1.      Improvements to the C10 Glen Striven Road between the limit of the A815 at Toward and the entrance to the site at the Memorial Hall, in accordance with the Road Improvement Plan in Appendix 1 of this report.  These works to be completed to adoption standard before the completion of the 21^st residential unit on site, or the completion of the ferry terminal, whichever is sooner;

 

2.      The formation of a footway to an adoptable standard between Toward Primary School and the entrance to the site at the Memorial Hall as detailed in the Road Improvement Plan in Appendix 1 of this report.  These works to be completed to an adoptable standard before the completion of the 21^st residential unit on site, or the completion of the ferry terminal, whichever is sooner;

 

3.    Extension of the 40 mph speed restriction to a point beyond the entrance to the development as detailed in the Road Improvement Plan in Appendix 1 of this report.  To be completed before the 50^th house is occupied and / or the ferry terminal is operational.

2.        In the event that the Section 75 is not concluded the application should be refused for the reason given in point H (ii) of the original report of handling dated 31 August 2009.

 

Moved by Councillor Bruce Marshall, seconded by Councillor Vivien Dance

 

Amendment

 

1.        To agree to the revised Heads of Terms for the Section 75 Agreement as detailed below:-

 

1.      Improvements to the C10 Glen Striven Road between the limit of the A815 at Toward and the entrance to the site at the Memorial Hall, in accordance with the Road Improvement Plan in Appendix 1 of this report.  These works to be completed to adoption standard before the completion of the 11^th residential unit on site, or the completion of the ferry terminal, whichever is sooner;

 

2.      The formation of a footway to an adoptable standard between Toward Primary School and the entrance to the site at the Memorial Hall as detailed in the Road Improvement Plan in Appendix 1 of this report.  These works to be completed to an adoptable standard before the completion of the 11^th residential unit on site, or the completion of the ferry terminal, whichever is sooner;

 

3.      Extension of the 40 mph speed restriction to a point beyond the entrance to the development as detailed in the Road Improvement Plan in Appendix 1 of this report.  To be completed before the 50^th house is occupied and / or the ferry terminal is operational.

2.        In the event that the Section 75 is not concluded the application should be refused for the reason given in point H (ii) of the original report of handling dated 31 August 2009.

 

Moved by Councillor Alex McNaughton, seconded by Councillor James McQueen.

 

Decision

 

On there being an equality of votes the Chair gave his casting vote for the Motion and the Committee resolved accordingly.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 31 August 2009, supplementary report no 1, supplementary report no 2 dated 7 March 2012, submitted and supplementary report no 3 dated 19 March 2012, tabled)

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

At its meeting on 22 February 2012 the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee agreed to continue consideration of this application to allow Councillor Devon to prepare an alternative Area Capacity Evaluation (ACE).  The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services spoke to the terms of supplementary report number 1 which advised of corrections to errors made in the original report and of a response received from the Crofters Commission after the initial report was finalised, along with a statement on subsequent queries posed to them.  He also referred to supplementary report number 2 which advised of an additional response received from the Crofters Commission.  The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services also advised of a further supplementary report number 3 which confirmed that the Crofter’s Commission have accepted the Applicant’s Croft Development Plan (CDP).  With this in mind the CDP can amount to a suitable locational justification for development and satisfies Structure Plan policy STRAT AC1 and that the original grounds of refusal number 2 no longer applied.  The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services advised that the first task for the Committee was to determine the details of the ACE prepared by Planning. 

 

Motion

 

To agree that the Area Capacity Evaluation (ACE) appended to the Planning report be adopted as a material consideration in the determination of this application and any future application within the defined area of common landscape character.

 

Moved by Councillor Daniel Kelly, seconded by Councillor Rory Colville.

 

Amendment

 

To agree that the Area Capacity Evaluation (ACE) prepared by Councillor Mary-Jean Devon be adopted as a material consideration in the determination of this application and any future application within the defined area of common landscape character.

 

Moved by Councillor Mary-Jean Devon, seconded by Councillor Roderick McCuish.

 

The Amendment was carried by 8 votes to 3 and the Committee resolved accordingly.

 

The Committee then went on to discuss the design of the house.  The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services advised that this application was for a contemporary, split level house with a large hipped roof which lends itself to a more suburban setting. He advised that as the ACE prepared by Councillor Devon has been adopted as a material consideration in the determination of this application and any future application within the defined area of common landscape character he recommended refusal of this application on the grounds of design.

 

Decision

 

1.        Agreed that the Area Capacity Evaluation (ACE) appended to this Minute be adopted as a material consideration in the determination of this application and any future application within the defined area of common landscape character; and

 

2.        Agreed to refuse planning permission for the following reason:-

 

Whilst it has been submitted that the design is dictated by the landscape and integrates well with the site, being set partially into the land, the design fails to take cognisance of the character of the existing development at the settlement, with which the proposed house would be readily inter-visible.  The existing character of housing around the site is for symmetrically pitched roofs, gable end walls and a maximum height of 1¾ storeys in scale.  The submitted design varies from the established character of the settlement and would be visually perceived within the same visual envelope as the rest of the settlement, which would create a lack of design cohesion within the settlement, contrary to the aims of the Development Plan.  The screen planting proposed in association with the development may in time contain the visibility of the building, but this in itself is not considered to justify allowing the design as submitted, nor is it considered to represent good planning practice.  Provision of so much screen planting would in itself be a variance with the open characteristics of the settlement and as such, is also considered to be undesirable in this location.

 

(Reference: Supplementary Report No 1 dated 7 March 2012 and supplementary report no 2 dated 14 March 2012, submitted and supplementary report no 3 dated 20 March 2012, and ACE prepared by Councillor Mary-Jean Devon, tabled)

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

At its meeting on 22 February 2012 the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee agreed to continue consideration of this application to allow Councillor Devon to prepare an alternative Area Capacity Evaluation (ACE).  The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services advised that in view of the decision made by the Committee in respect of planning application 11/00847/PP he recommended approval of this application subject to a section 75 legal agreement and appropriate conditions and reasons to be determined by the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee.

 

Decision

 

Agreed to grant planning permission subject to:-

 

1.        A Section 75 Agreement being concluded to prevent the house being sold separately from the croft holding and to resist any further croft sub-division in order to help underpin the locational/operational need for the croft house in a sensitive countryside zone (where open countryside development would not normally be supported); and

 

2.        Appropriate conditions and reasons being drawn up by the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee.

 

(Reference: Reference: Supplementary Report No 1 dated 7 March 2012 and supplementary report no 2 dated 14 March 2012, submitted and supplementary report no 3 dated 20 March 2012, tabled)

The Chair ruled and the Committee agreed to adjourn at 1.15 pm for lunch.

 

The Committee reconvened at 1.50 pm.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services spoke to the terms of the report advising that this was a Council interest application seeking permission for the renovation of and the extension to the listed former Clyde Street school to provide offices for the Council as well as incorporating both indoor and outdoor space for community purposes and a café.  Parking would be provided on site with additional spaces located remotely at Grant Street.  In order to protect the development from coastal flooding, enhanced sea defences are also proposed.  Two letters of support and 4 letters of objection were received along with an objection from the Helensburgh Community Council.  He also referred to supplementary report number 1 tabled at the meeting which advised of the withdrawal of SEPA’s objection to the proposal.  All elements of this proposal accord with the Development Plan and there are no adverse material considerations which would indicate otherwise and it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions listed in the report.

 

Decision

 

Agreed to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions and reasons:-

 

1.        The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details specified on the application form dated 9/12/11 and the approved drawing reference numbers P0-AL(0-) 001A, P1-AL(0-)001, P1-AL(0-)002, P1-AL(0-) 003, P3-AL (0-)001, P4-AL(0)001, P0-AL(--)001A, P0-AL(--)002B, P0-AL(--) 003, P0-AL(--) 004, P0-AE(--) 001A, P2-AS(--) 001, P2-AS(--)002, P1-AS(--)001, P0-AS(--)001, P3-AL(--)001, P4-AL(--)001, L001D, L002A, P1-AD(--)001, P1-S(--)001, P3/4-S (--)001 unless the prior written approval of the planning authority is obtained for other materials/finishes/for an amendment to the approved details under Section 64 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

 

Reason: For the purpose of clarity, to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with the approved details.

 

2.        No works shall commence on site until the detailed design of the vehicular access and improvements on Grant Street including the street lighting are submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with the Roads Network Manager. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the duly approved details unless any variation thereof is agreed in advance in writing.

Reason:  In the interests of road safety.

3.        The car parking and signalised junction as detailed on the approved plans shall be fully operational prior to the development hereby approved being brought into use.

Reason:  In the interests of road safety.

 

4.        Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the proposed sea defences shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority.  Thereafter these sea defences shall be constructed in accordance with these details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the planning authority and these shall be fully completed prior to the development hereby approved being brought into use.

Reason:  In order to ensure that the site is adequately protected against coastal flooding.

 

5.        A repeat bat survey shall be undertaken prior to the commencement of development.  If bats are found prior to commencement or during the course of works, all works must stop and Scottish Natural Heritage should be contacted for advice on how to proceed, prior to any further work taking place.

Reason: In the interests of protecting this European Protected Species

 

6.        That a  minimum of 20 bat slates and access points must be incorporated into the roof space of the property and made available to roosting bats no later than 1 December 2013. The completed provision of these features must be signed-off, in writing, by a licensed bat worker.

 

Reason:  To compensate for the loss of any roosts when carrying out the roof repair works under EPS license (Ref: DEROG 063/2011) 

 

7.        Development shall not begin until samples of materials to be used (on external surfaces of the buildings) and/or in construction of hard standings/walls/fences) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.  Development shall thereafter be carried out using the approved materials or such alternatives as may be agreed in writing, with the Planning Authority.

 

Reason:  In order to integrate the development into its surroundings.

 

8.        All landscaping shall be in accordance with drawing nos. L001D and L002A. The landscaping scheme shall be completed during the first planting season following the first occupation of the development.  Any trees or shrubs which fail to become established, which die, are removed or become seriously diseased within 10 years of the implementation of the scheme shall be replaced in the following planting season by equivalent size and species of trees or shrubs as those originally required to be planted.

 

Reason:  In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure that adequate measures are put in place to protect the landscaping and planting in the long term.

 

9.        That the existing “boys” and “girls” railings shall be retained and reused within the proposed open space.  Full details including the proposed removal, storage, treatment and final location of these railings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development.

Reason:  In the interests of retaining a portion of the railings which is of historic interest and will function as a reminder of the past use of the building whilst also providing and attractive feature in the open space.

 

10.    That prior to the commencement of development a full drainage assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority.  This should identify:

 

·       Overland flow paths on site due to culvert blockages or extreme event runoff;

·       Design calculations for the surface water drainage proposals.  The level of flood management required is for the 1 in 200 year event with an allowance for climate change.  If this level is not contained on site, a flow path diagram should be provided showing overland routes;

·       Details and proposals for any existing drainage infrastructure on the site;

·       A method statement for surface water containment during construction;

·       Design / calculations for SUDS covering levels and attenuation;

·       The proposed maintenance regime for any SUDS;

·       Details / calculations of the permeability of the bound gravel area  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Principal Planning Officer spoke to the terms of the report advising that this was for planning permission in principle for a site for the erection of two dwellinghouses.  Whilst the site is predominantly located within a ‘rural opportunity area’ the identified site straddles the boundary with adjoining ‘countryside around settlement’ and in this respect the proposal is considered to be ‘open countryside’ development.  The portion of the application site which is located within ‘rural opportunity area’ is also not without issue as the development is situation within the wider Knapdale/Melfort ‘Area of Panoramic Quality’ and as such the proposal requires to be considered against the recommendations of the Council’s Landscape Capacity Study for Mid Argyll and Inveraray.  The Applicant has submitted their own Landscape Capacity Study in support of the proposal.  An Area Capacity Evaluation has been triggered to look more closely at the issue of capacity in light of the previous grants of planning permission and it is recommended that this be adopted as a material consideration in the determination of this application and any future application within the defined area of common landscape character. Whilst the ACE does identify very limited potential for an additional dwelling, it does not concur with the recommendations of the Applicant’s Landscape Capacity Study and finds that the current proposal would not only result in the overdevelopment to this loose cluster of development in the countryside, but is also likely to intrude significantly and incongruously within the indentified key views both into and out of the ACE compartment.  In this respect it is considered that the proposal will have a significant adverse impact upon the Knapdale/Melfort Area of Panoramic Quality and as such is contrary to the provisions of STRAT DC 4, STRAT DC 8, LP ENV 10 and LP ENV 1 and it is recommended that this application for planning permission in principle be refused for the reasons set out in the report.

 

Decision

 

1.        Agreed to continue consideration of this application to the next meeting and to ask the Applicant to investigate the possibility of amending the layout to bring all the physical elements of the proposal into the ‘rural opportunity area’ boundary;  and

 

2.        Agreed that Members how they might justify that more than one additional house could be accommodated within the boundary of the Area Capacity Evaluation (ACE) and to amend the ACE accordingly.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 6 March 2012, submitted)

Councillors James McQueen, Donald MacMillan and Bruce Marshall left the meeting.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Principal Planning Officer spoke to the terms of the report advising that this application seeks permission to amend a Section 75 Agreement linked to planning permission 98/01377/REM and 99/00886/VARCON which restricts the occupation of the dwellinghouse to a person(s) employed or last employed in the management and/or operation of the Island Bakery, Lephain, Tobermory, Isle of Mull and their dependent(s) or the widow(er) of such a person in all time coming and in accordance with the conditions laid down in Planning Permission 90/01377/REM.  The Applicant has stated that during the process of re-mortgaging the dwellinghouse with a new lender, the legal agreement was noted which prevented him from moving his mortgage.  Accordingly, this application seeks to have the Section 75 Agreement amended to allow any mortgage lender to sell the property on the open market in the event of re-possession.  Such an amendment to the Section 75 Agreement would allow the owner of the land to exercise a power of sale in terms of the standard security by reasons of the granters being in default but would still ensure that the occupancy of the dwellinghouse be limited as previously intended, in all other circumstances.  This provision was not built into the Agreement in 1999 but is now routinely included in the terms of Section 75 Agreements within the Council area and accordingly it was recommended that the Section 75 Agreement be amended as per the detail in the report.

 

Decision

 

Agreed that the Section 75 Agreement be amended to provide:-

 

“The occupation of the dwellinghouse to which planning permission relates, shall be limited to a person(s) employed, or last employed in the management and/or operation of the Island Bakery, Lephain, Tobermory, Isle of Mull.  In the event that any person, company or organisation; in whose favour the owner of the land on which the dwellinghouse is built grants a Standard Security over that said land; exercises a power of sale in terms of the said Standard Security by reason of the granters [applicants] being in default, then this Section 75 Legal Agreement shall cease to apply”.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 6 March 2012, submitted)

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services spoke to the terms of the report advising that planning permission was sought for the siting of an amusement park on Helensburgh Pier which is owned by the Council.  A series of planning permissions have been granted on a temporary basis for the siting of the fair in its present location since 1976, with no identified adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding area or residents and it is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable and accords with Policies LP ENV 1 and LP BAD 1 of the Argyll and Bute Local Plan, subject to the imposition of operating conditions.  In approving previous applications, the permission has been time limited to a year, apart from the last consent which was granted temporary consent for three years on the basis that a longer permission may prejudice the future redevelopment of the pier head area which is seen as a key component in the regeneration of the waterfront.  A masterplan for the pier head is ongoing and commitments have been made in the capital programme for a new swimming pool and flood defences.  Given these issues, it is considered that a temporary permission of three years could impact on these proposals and it is therefore recommended that temporary permission of one year be granted subject to conditions and reasons detailed in the report.

 

Decision

 

Agreed to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions and reasons:-

 

1.        Permission shall enure for a period of 1 year from the date of this consent.

 

Reason: Imposed in order not to prejudice the provisions of appropriate future levels of parking provision for Helensburgh in the longer term and not to prejudice the provisions of the current development plan for the area.

 

2.        The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details specified on the application form dated 23/01/2012 and the approved drawing reference number 1/1 unless the prior written approval of the planning authority is obtained for an amendment to the approved details under Section 64 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

 

Reason: For the purpose of clarity, to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with the approved details.

 

3.        At the end of the period of permission the use authorised by the permission shall be discontinued unless an application for an extension of the period is approved by the Council.

 

Reason: Imposed in order not to prejudice the provisions of appropriate future levels of parking provision for Helensburgh in the longer term and not to prejudice the provisions of the current development plan for the area.

 

4.        No engine, generator, public address system or music amplification system shall be used after 11.00pm on any evening.

Reason:  Imposed in order to provide control over the timing and volume of noise from the fair in the interests of maintaining appropriate levels of residential and public amenity.

 

5.        The noise level attributable to the amusement fair measured within a dwelling, hospital or school shall not exceed 50 dB(A) for more than 10% of the time, as measured over any 15 minute period.

Reason: Imposed in order to provide control over the timing and volume of noise from the fair in the interests of maintaining appropriate levels of residential and public amenity.

 

6.        Any fencing to be erected towards the northern edge of the application site (to the rear of the swimming pool and play areas) shall be positioned so as to allow a 2m gap to be maintained as a pedestrian / disabled access route to connect with the ramp to the pier.

 

Reason:  In order that uninhibited pedestrian and disabled access may be maintained to the pier ramps.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 1 March 2012, submitted)

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

Consideration was given to a report advising that planning permission (ref 10/00781/PP) was approved in August 2010 providing a two year temporary planning permission for the use of land at the Machrihanish Airbase as a Roads Depot by the Council for period of two years expiring on 18 August 2012.  The current submission seeks a variation to the provisions of condition 1 to allow an extension of the temporary time period of the permission for an additional two year period to allow the Council to produce and, if appropriate, implement proposals to provide a combined Roads, Amenity and Fleet Services Depot on an extended site at the airbase.  Development of these proposals relies upon the preparation of a masterplan for the wider development of the airbase by the site operator; at present the airbase is in the process of being disposed of by Defence Estates with the Machrihanish Airbase Community Company identified as the preferred bidder, however development of the masterplan will not be undertaken until such time as transfer of land has been completed.  The current application seeks to secure the ongoing retention of the Roads Depot during this period of uncertainty and to avoid any planning enforcement liability in the short term.  Other than the successful implementation of the previously approved details, there has been no material change in the circumstances of the site and as such it would be appropriate to allow retention of the facility for a further short term, temporary period.

 

Decision

 

Agreed that condition 1 relative to 10/00781/PP be varied to allow a further period of temporary planning permission subject to the following conditions and reasons:-

 

1.        This permission shall cease on or before 18^th August 2014 and immediately thereafter the buildings hereby permitted shall be removed from site and the land restored to its former condition.

 

Reason: In accordance with the details applied for, this permission being a temporary use only.

 

2.        The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details specified on the application form dated 23^rd January 2012 and the approved drawing reference numbers 1/11 – 11/11 relative to planning permission ref. 10/00781/PP unless the prior written approval of the planning authority is obtained for other materials/finishes/for an amendment to the approved details under Section 64 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

 

Reason: For the purpose of clarity, to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with the approved details.

 

3.        The site shall solely be utilised as a Local Authority Roads Depot and shall not be used for any other purpose without the benefit of express planning permission.

 

Reason: To accord with the use applied for, and in order to allow the Planning Authority to control any subsequent change of use which might otherwise be permissible in order to protect the amenities of the area.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 2March 2012, submitted)

Councillors Rory Colville and Vivien Dance left the meeting.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

Consideration was given to a report prepared in response to a letter from Scotland’s Chief Planner which was issued to all planning authorities, dated 4 November 2011, and clarifies the Council’s procedure for dealing with rural housing and occupancy conditions.

 

Decision

 

1.        Noted the contents of the letter from the Government’s Chief Planner and confirmed that the current use of occupancy restrictions in certain specific situations (Green Belt & Open Sensitive Countryside) currently applied in Argyll and Bute is necessary, proportionate and is in accordance with Scottish Planning and Local Plan Policy as well as spirit of said letter; and

 

2.        Agreed to respond to the Chief Planner’s letter be providing a copy of the minute and report to him.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services and letter from Scotland’s Chief Planner, submitted)

The Committee resolved in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the public for the following 2 items of business on the grounds that they were likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 13 and 13 respectively of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

Consideration was given to an update on enforcement case 10/00201 ENOTH 2.

 

Decision

 

Agreed the recommendation detailed in the report.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 5 March 2012)

Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services

Consideration was given to an update on enforcement case 10/00319/ENAMEN.

 

Decision

 

Agreed the recommendation detailed in the report.

 

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning and Regulatory Services dated 20 March 2012, tabled)

 

Appendix

 

AREA CAPACITY EVALUATION RELATIVE TO ARDTUN, ISLE OF MULL

 

Area Capacity Evaluation in respect of Cul A Mhill, Ardtun, Bunessan, Isle of Mull

 

a)                  Purpose of the assessment

 

This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the Supplementary Planning Guidance approved by the Council on 19^th February 2009. 

 

In this case, the evaluation is triggered on the basis of a house for a bareland croft, on land that has been subdivided with four house plots having been separated from a larger croft in the past (formerly known as Torr Na Locha Croft). Plots subdivided off have references 02/01478/OUT, 03/01460/OUT, 05/00564/OUT, and 05/00567/OUT.  All of those plots have been subject to subsequent detailed applications running between 2005 and 2009.  None of those plots were submitted with a claim of locational or operational need, nor was such justification sought prior to granting the initial outline applications. 

 

Two different designs have been submitted for a house on the same proposed site, because the applicants seek a decision on both prospective designs.  The site lies within a ‘rural opportunity area’, refined by the adopted Landscape Capacity Study of December 2009 (LCS), which identifies the site within a ‘Red Area’ not recommended for development.  On such land, the Planning Authority assesses applications on the basis of the land being ‘sensitive countryside’.  Although single croft houses, and single additional houses on crofts, are supported in principle by Argyll and Bute Structure Plan 2002 Policy STRAT DC5 part (A) (subject also to compliance with STRAT AC1), the existence of more than one previous additional house on croft land necessitates assessment of the current proposal as a ‘special case’ under STRAT DC5 part (B) which includes a requirement for a formal area capacity evaluation (ACE).

 

The Council’s adopted guidance requires that the findings should be made available to applicants and/or agents and to Members in advance of the determination of any related planning application(s) in order that, if necessary, there is an opportunity to prepare a response to the findings for consideration by Committee at the time the application(s) is/are determined and the ACE is given consideration as part of that determination process.

 

The area to be assessed should be identified as a wider ‘area of common landscape character’ within which the prospective development site(s) is/are located. ACE’s will be considered by Members at the same time as the related development proposal(s) is/are being determined, and once endorsed will become a material consideration in respect of any future applications within that ACE compartment.    

 

b)                  Area of Common Landscape Character

 

The application site and bareland croft lie within the northern section of an expansive ‘rural opportunity area’ (ROA), encompassing Ardtun in the centre and north, Knockan to the east, Loch Assapol to the south, and almost reaching Eorabus to the west. The Landscape Capacity Study recognises that the settlement pattern forms distinct clusters of development that are separated from each other within the wider ROA.  The ACE compartment to be reviewed through this process may legitimately be restricted to the land spurring north from the Knockan to Lower Ardtun public road. The compartment straddles land rising from the foreshore in the east, crossing the settled area and includes improved fields and contained grazing fields as far as their boundary with open moorland to the west.  The eastern and western boundaries follow existing mapped fence lines.  The north of the compartment is defined by a raised knoll.  The entire site and croft are visually perceived within this northern settled part of the ROA. 

 

The ROA was identified through the local plan as a generally homogenous and relatively low lying area with some potential to absorb small scale development which would be capable of reinforcing the established settlement pattern in the locality and which could be accommodated without compromising the landscape character of the area.  Its character is distinct from the lower lying shore to the east and from the slightly more elevated undeveloped land which bounds the ROA to the north and west, which is included within the ‘sensitive countryside’ zone. The public road forms the southern compartment boundary.

 

The local plan allocation was refined by the 2009 LCS, because the ROA also lies within an Area of Panoramic Quality.  The study identifies large areas of the ROA which are not considered appropriate for development (Red Areas), whilst identifying a number of opportunities for strengthening the established clusters of development spread throughout the ROA (Orange Areas).

 

The ACE compartment is in an area categorised by the Scottish Natural Heritage  Landscape Assessment of Argyll and the Firth of Clyde 1996 as ‘Basalt Lowlands’, characterised by:

 

·  Indented coastline – low headlands with a distinctive stepped profile

·  Open moorland broken by rocky outcrops and ledges

·  Scattered small-holdings and cottages on the edge of the moor

·  Gently undulating landform, between 20m and 60m AOD, with numerous rocky outcrops of varying height and size.

 

Within the ACE compartment, there are different areas of common landscape character as illustrated on the plans attached to this evaluation, and detailed in the matrix below.  The application site lies beyond the northern edge of the gently sloping grazed fields that constitute the majority of the croft, and occupies a slightly steeper, more rugged landscape with bracken vegetation cover, leading into scrub vegetation across the raised rocky knoll further north.

 

c)                  Key Environmental Features

 

 Most of the ACE compartment is open moorland comprising rough grazing and areas of bracken and heather, along with substantial areas of grazed fields on similar, gently sloping low lying land.  There is very little tree cover. Existing housing development is made up of two patterns of development.  The main development has a linear form, staggered on both sides of the private track that runs from the end of the public road and bounds the west of the croft.  Housing here is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.