Agenda item

Report by Head of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services

The Major Applications Team Leader spoke to the terms of the report.  The application site is an area of woodland located on the eastern approaches to the village of Kilcreggan.  It is proposed to develop the steeply sloping site by way of a development comprising a hybrid of housing, tourist development, live-work development, community elements and co-housing elements.  The development includes 7 two storey residential accommodation units, linked by bridges and footpaths.  The application site has significant amenity value in the immediate area and wider setting of Rosneath due to its mature tree cover and woodland appearance.  The proposed development will result in the loss of part of this important woodland area, which occupies a prominent position within the locality.  The application site is designated as an Open Space Protection Area.  The proposal is considered contrary to Policies LDP 3, LDP 9, SG LDP ENV 14, LDP 3, SG LDP ENV 6 and SG LDP REC/COM2 of the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan.  The proposal is also considered unacceptable in terms of road traffic safety and as such is also considered contrary to Policies SG LDP TRAN 4 and SG LDP TRAN 6 of the Local Development Plan and it is recommended that planning permission be refused for the reasons stated in the report of handling.

Decision

The Committee agreed to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1.    The application site has significant amenity value in the immediate area and wider setting of Rosneath due to its mature tree cover and woodland appearance. The steeply sloping nature of the majority of the site, and the design solutions proposed to address this, will result in a form of development which would appear out of context with the surroundings. The proposed units are box like in appearance some 10.7 metres in height, 7.6 to 10 metres long, with a roof pitch of 48 degrees and built on stilts. The combination of tall, narrow buildings with a steep roof pitch on stilts on this prominent location set against existing development of varied design but conventional footprint and layout adjoining the site would result in a development that would have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the locality by virtue of introducing built development that is out of character with its surroundings. The proposal is therefore contrary to the terms of Policies LDP 3, LDP 9, and SG LDP ENV 14 of the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan which, inter alia, resist development which does not maintain and enhance the character of existing residential areas.

2.    The proposed development will result in the loss of part of this important woodland area, which occupies a prominent position within the locality and which successfully integrates and softens the impact of existing residential development into its wider landscape setting. The loss of these trees and other vegetation cover and their replacement with buildings access road, hardstanding, paths, new drainage and car park will be visually intrusive, visually discordant and will not maintain or enhance the character of the area. The proposal will also prevent significant regeneration and replanting of trees by substantially reducing the areas available for tree cover and changing the character of the site from woodland to built form. Taking into account the loss of trees which will be required to accommodate the proposed development, the risk of damage to many of the remaining trees during the construction stage and the potential subsequent pressure to remove trees because of proximity to the buildings both in terms of shading and risk of windblow as a result of root damage during construction the proposed development would not be compatible with Policy. As such the proposal does not accord with Policies LDP 3 – Supporting the Protection, Conservation and Enhancement of our Environment and SG LDP ENV6 (Development Impact upon Trees/Woodland) of the Argyll and Bute Development Plan 2015.

3.    The application site is 0.41 hectares in size, has amenity value in the immediate area and wider setting of Kilcreggan and is designated as an Open Space Protection Area. In terms of mitigation the applicants propose a new communal hall to serve the village. Whilst this will have community benefit, the proposed development will result in the loss of this area which makes a specific contribution to the wider area as a green space, wildlife corridor and buffer between housing. The loss of this space and its replacement with buildings, access road, hardstanding and car park will be visually intrusive, visually discordant and will not maintain or enhance the character of the area. Consequently, the communal building is not considered to be an alternative provision of equal community benefit given its size and existing function. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy SG LDP REC/COM 2 Safeguarding Sports Fields, Recreation Areas and Open Space Protection Areas of the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan which, inter alia, presumes against the development or redevelopment of formally established public or private playing fields or sports pitches or those recreational areas and open space protection areas shown to be safeguarded in the LDP Proposals Maps.

4.    The proposed private access is contrary to the minimum standards set out in the Council’s Road Development Guide in relation to adequate visibility splays and turning capacities. The applicant has not supplied the acceptable visibility sightline splays of 2.4m x 53m x 1.05 at the new junction and has not offered any mitigation for this in the absence of speed survey data. The off street parking provision is also contrary to policy as it shows the provision for 11 parking spaces, however, the residential units require 12 parking spaces, there is also no parking provision shown to support the Communal build which has the potential to be used by local community groups. As such the proposal is contrary to Policy SG LDP TRAN 4 – New and Existing Public Road and Private Access Regimes and SG LDP TRAN 6 –Vehicle Parking Provision.

Having moved an Amendment which failed to find a seconder, Councillor George Freeman asked for his dissent from the foregoing decision to be recorded.

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services dated 4 February 2019, submitted)