Venue: By Microsoft Teams
Contact: Fiona McCallum, Committee Services Officer Tel: 01546 604392
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Minutes: There were no apologies for absence. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
|
Additional documents:
Minutes: The Chair, Councillor Kieron Green, welcomed
everyone to the meeting. He explained
that no person present would be entitled to speak other than the Members of the
Local Review Body (LRB) and Mr Jackson, who would provide procedural advice if
required. He
advised that his first task would be to establish if the Members of the LRB
felt that they had sufficient information before them to come to a decision on
the Review. All Members of the LRB confirmed that they
had sufficient information before them and the proceeded to determine the case. Councillor Hardie
advised that he had considered what the grounds for Review were, whether or not
there was any new evidence admitted and whether or not there were any procedural
errors. He said that having considered
all the evidence before him he could see no reason to grant this application
and that he agreed with the Planning Officer’s decision to refuse this application
for the reasons detailed at page 51 of the Agenda pack for today’s meeting. Councillor Green said that he was largely in agreement
with Councillor Hardie. He referred to guidance available locally and
nationally from different organisations in terms of how sensitive buildings
should be treated. He advised that he
would have expected these guidelines to be followed in this instance, in terms
of timber framing and double glazing, and that he was disappointed to see this
had not been done. He said that given
the lack of sensitivity to the area with the proposed introduction of uPVC
windows with standard double glazing, he felt he had no option but to agree
with the previous decision made by the Planning Officer to refuse planning
permission. Councillor Wallace confirmed that he was in
agreement with both Councillor Hardie and Councillor
Green. Decision The Argyll and Bute Local Review Body, having
considered the merits of the case de novo, unanimously agreed to uphold the
Planning Officer’s decision to refuse planning permission for the following reason: 1. The
proposed development is contrary to Policies 7 and 14 of NPF4 and Policies 01,
05, 08, 09 and 17 of the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan 2 in that it
would, if permitted, undermine the host building’s architectural/historic
character and setting and fail to preserve or enhance the character or
appearance of the Port Charlotte Conservation Area. (Reference: Notice of Review and Supporting Documents; comments by Planning Officer; and comments by Applicant, submitted) |