2 - Report and Appendices Alton Way
North Ayrshire Council · 20 September 2023
Back to Local Review Body — 20 September 2023 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Some pages contain no extractable text. They may be blank, graphics or scanned pages. OCR has not been applied.
Page 1
NORTH AYRSHIRE COUNCIL 23 August 2023 Local Review Body Title: Notice of Review: 23/00254/PP: 6 Alton Way, West Kilbride KA23 9JJ Purpose: To submit, for consideration of the Local Review Body, a Notice of Review by the applicant in respect of a planning application refused by officers under delegated powers. Recommendation: That the Local Review Body considers the Notice of Review. 1. Executive Summary 1.1 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2006, provides for certain categories of planning application for "local" developments to be determined by appointed officers under delegated powers. Where such an application is refused, granted subject to conditions or not determined within the prescribed period of 2 months, the applicant may submit a Notice of Review to require the Planning Authority to review the case. Notices of Review in relation to refusals must be submitted within 3 months of the date of the Decision Notice. 2. Background 2.1 A Notice of Review was submitted in respect of Planning Application 23/00254/PP for the erection of a 1.5m (5ft) fence and gate onto walkway within front garden area (retrospective) at 6 Alton Way, West Kilbride KA23 9JJ. 2.2 The application was refused by officers for the reasons detailed in the Decision Notice. 2.3 The following related documents are set out in the appendices to the report: Appendix 1 - Notice of Review documentation; Appendix 2 - Report of Handling; Appendix 3 - Location Plan; and Appendix 4 - Planning Decision Notice. 3. Proposals 3.1 The Local Review Body is invited to consider the Notice of Review.
Page 2
4. Implications/Socio-economic Duty Financial 4.1 None arising from the recommendation of this report. Human Resources 4.2 None arising from the recommendation of this report. Legal 4.3 The Notice of Review requires to be considered in terms of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2006, and the Town and Country Planning (Schemes of Delegation and Local Review Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013. Equality/Socio-economic 4.4 None arising from the recommendation of this report. Environmental and Sustainability 4.5 None arising from the recommendation of this report. Key Priorities 4.6 None arising from the recommendation of this report. Community Benefits 4.7 None arising from the recommendation of this report. 5. Consultation 5.1 Interested parties (both objectors to the planning application and statutory consultees) were invited to submit representations in terms of the Notice of Review and no further representations were received. Craig Hatton Chief Executive For further information please contact Diane McCaw, Committee Services Officer, on 01294 324133. Background Papers 0
Page 3
Page 1 of 4 Cunninghame House Friars Croft Irvine KA12 8EE Email: eplanning@north-ayrshire.gov.uk Applications cannot be validated until all the necessary documentation has been submitted and the required fee has been paid. Thank you for completing this application form: ONLINE REFERENCE 100639793-001 The online reference is the unique reference for your online form only. The Planning Authority will allocate an Application Number when your form is validated. Please quote this reference if you need to contact the planning Authority about this application. Applicant or Agent Details Are you an applicant or an agent? * (An agent is an architect, consultant or someone else acting on behalf of the applicant in connection with this application) Applicant Agent Applicant Details Please enter Applicant details Title: You must enter a Building Name or Number, or both: * Other Title: Building Name: First Name: * Building Number: Address 1 Last Name: * (Street): * Company/Organisation Address 2: Telephone Number: * Town/City: * Extension Number: Country: * Mobile Number: Postcode: * Fax Number: Email Address: * Ms Jenny Heywood
Page 4
Page 2 of 4 Site Address Details Planning Authority: Full postal address of the site (including postcode where available): Address 1: Address 2: Address 3: Address 4: Address 5: Town/City/Settlement: Post Code: Please identify/describe the location of the site or sites Northing Easting Description of Proposal Please provide a description of your proposal to which your review relates. The description should be the same as given in the application form, or as amended with the agreement of the planning authority: * (Max 500 characters) Type of Application What type of application did you submit to the planning authority? * Application for planning permission (including householder application but excluding application to work minerals). Application for planning permission in principle. Further application. Application for approval of matters specified in conditions. 6 ALTON WAY I was served a notice of a planning breach after having installed a fence in my front garden. I had contacted the planning department before purchasing the property to ask if we would be able to put up a 5ft fence in the front garden and was told that we could. After it was put up, we received the notice and retrospective planning permission has been declined. The fence is needed to keep my rescue dogs safe. North Ayrshire Council WEST KILBRIDE KA23 9JJ 647917 220501
Page 5
Page 3 of 4 What does your review relate to? * Refusal Notice. Grant of permission with Conditions imposed. No decision reached within the prescribed period (two months after validation date or any agreed extension) – deemed refusal. Statement of reasons for seeking review You must state in full, why you are a seeking a review of the planning authority’s decision (or failure to make a decision). Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. If necessary this can be provided as a separate document in the ‘Supporting Documents’ section: * (Max 500 characters) Note: you are unlikely to have a further opportunity to add to your statement of appeal at a later date, so it is essential that you produce all of the information you want the decision-maker to take into account. You should not however raise any new matter which was not before the planning authority at the time it decided your application (or at the time expiry of the period of determination), unless you can demonstrate that the new matter could not have been raised before that time or that it not being raised before that time is a consequence of exceptional circumstances. Have you raised any matters which were not before the appointed officer at the time the Yes No Determination on your application was made? * If yes, you should explain in the box below, why you are raising the new matter, why it was not raised with the appointed officer before your application was determined and why you consider it should be considered in your review: * (Max 500 characters) Please provide a list of all supporting documents, materials and evidence which you wish to submit with your notice of review and intend to rely on in support of your review. You can attach these documents electronically later in the process: * (Max 500 characters) Application Details Please provide the application reference no. given to you by your planning authority for your previous application. What date was the application submitted to the planning authority? * What date was the decision issued by the planning authority? * I have enclosed a document laying out my case. In short, I was given inaccurate information prior to purchasing the property and installing the fence. The property was purchased largely because of the garden and the fence is needed to keep my dogs safe. I was told it is not in keeping with the character of the area, but other properties already have 5 or 6-foot fences around their properties. Dogs leaping up at fences and barking at passersby, however, is more of an issue. Attached are photos of the fence to demonstrate that it is not how it was represented (ie, not a 6ft closed board fence) and a letter laying out the reasons for needing the fence N/100624029-001 19/05/2023 18/04/2023
Page 6
Page 4 of 4 Review Procedure The Local Review Body will decide on the procedure to be used to determine your review and may at any time during the review process require that further information or representations be made to enable them to determine the review. Further information may be required by one or a combination of procedures, such as: written submissions; the holding of one or more hearing sessions and/or inspecting the land which is the subject of the review case. Can this review continue to a conclusion, in your opinion, based on a review of the relevant information provided by yourself and other parties only, without any further procedures? For example, written submission, hearing session, site inspection. * Yes No In the event that the Local Review Body appointed to consider your application decides to inspect the site, in your opinion: Can the site be clearly seen from a road or public land? * Yes No Is it possible for the site to be accessed safely and without barriers to entry? * Yes No Checklist – Application for Notice of Review Please complete the following checklist to make sure you have provided all the necessary information in support of your appeal. Failure to submit all this information may result in your appeal being deemed invalid. Have you provided the name and address of the applicant?. * Yes No Have you provided the date and reference number of the application which is the subject of this Yes No review? * If you are the agent, acting on behalf of the applicant, have you provided details of your name Yes No N/A and address and indicated whether any notice or correspondence required in connection with the review should be sent to you or the applicant? * Have you provided a statement setting out your reasons for requiring a review and by what Yes No procedure (or combination of procedures) you wish the review to be conducted? * Note: You must state, in full, why you are seeking a review on your application. Your statement must set out all matters you consider require to be taken into account in determining your review. You may not have a further opportunity to add to your statement of review at a later date. It is therefore essential that you submit with your notice of review, all necessary information and evidence that you rely on and wish the Local Review Body to consider as part of your review. Please attach a copy of all documents, material and evidence which you intend to rely on Yes No (e.g. plans and Drawings) which are now the subject of this review * Note: Where the review relates to a further application e.g. renewal of planning permission or modification, variation or removal of a planning condition or where it relates to an application for approval of matters specified in conditions, it is advisable to provide the application reference number, approved plans and decision notice (if any) from the earlier consent. Declare – Notice of Review I/We the applicant/agent certify that this is an application for review on the grounds stated. Declaration Name: Ms Jenny Heywood Declaration Date: 18/08/2023
Page 7
When we bought the house, we did so principally because of the garden. With two large rescue dogs, we had been looking for a house with a big garden near the sea. This house seemed perfect and in fact, we purchased it without ever having been able to view the inside. We did, however, do our due diligence first, calling the planning department to ascertain that we would be allowed to fence it. Having read the planning guidance and established that there was no adjacent road, and having spoken to a planning officer, we were confident that the fence was allowed within the guidance. It was very surprising to subsequently receive a leter sta�ng that we had breached the guidance. We opted to apply for retrospec�ve planning consent and laid out our reasons for needing the fence. I have two large rescue dogs. Both have been mistreated and whilst not aggressive, they are reac�ve and protec�ve of their property. Most rescue centres specify that they will only rehome dogs to homes which have a minimum of 5� fences. Addi�onally, it is my responsibility as a dog owner to ensure that my dogs are under control and not a threat to anyone visi�ng the property. According to the Blue Cross, “A dog doesn’t have to bite or physically injure someone for an offence to take place. If a person feels your dog may hurt them, they may s�ll be considered ‘dangerously out of control’.” I have taken steps to ensure that they are under control by making sure that they are securely fenced. With a 1 metre fence, I cannot ensure this. If my dogs were to cause harm, I would be held accountable, but if I have been prevented from adequately protec�ng them, then who is accountable? Two doors down from us there is a large poodle who frequently jumps up at his fence and barks when people walk past. I love dogs and I am confident around them but I have been frightened by his behaviour when I walk past on my own. It is a lot worse when I try and walk past with my dogs, all three dogs are extremely reac�ve to each other. This seems far more out of character with the area than a well-constructed but slightly higher fence. I have spoken with someone else who lives in a house which fronts this same footpath who told me she has also been frightened by this dog. The breach leter we received stated that we had installed a 6-foot, closed board fence. It is, in fact, a 5-foot pailing-type fence. This implies that contrary to what was stated, no one from the planning department had come out to view the fence.
Page 8
This situa�on has caused an immense amount of stress over the last few months. Installing the fence was expensive but necessary for the security of my dogs. Now being told that I have to pay for the fence to be taken down by a foot, leaves me with no solu�on to keep my dogs safe. Financially, I was made redundant in March and will have to borrow money to money to rec�fy the situa�on. This then leaves me with very few, very expensive op�ons to keep my dogs safe and contained. Either way, I am being prevented from using my own space in the way I want. I understand that when the houses were built, there was a par�cular vision for their use, but 60 or so years on, people’s lifestyles have changed. The lifestyle of the people living here now should take precedence over the vision of architects and town planners from decades ago. Addi�onally, there are already precedents for local homes to be using their front gardens more like back gardens and having fenced them accordingly. I should not be penalised for doing likewise, especially having been advised that I was within my rights to do so. With the excep�on of the postman, every delivery person, tradesperson and visitor to my home comes to my back door. If I am forced to use the (much smaller) back garden, I will need to take down the garage, which takes up roughly a third of the space and fence it. This will cost over £6000 (in addi�on to the cost of reducing the height of the front fence) and will then make it incredibly difficult for me to receive visitors and packages whilst s�ll ensuring that my dogs are secure. It is par�cularly upse�ng that all this would have been avoided had we not been given the wrong informa�on in the first place. Without having received the advice that we could fence the front garden, we would not have purchased the property in the first place. We had no inten�on of breaching the rules and had no idea that we were doing so when we installed the fence. And what is more, we have been further given poor advice from the planning department, such as being told that we could add a trellis to the fence. Further, when poin�ng out this discrepancy, I was told that it was my fault for not ge�ng the advice in wri�ng. With hindsight, I see this is the case, but I had no reason to suspect that I would need to do so having sought advice from the planning department; I had no reason to think I couldn’t trust that advice.
Page 9
No embedded text on this page.
Page 10
No embedded text on this page.
Page 11
REPORT OF HANDLING Reference No: 23/00254/PP Proposal: Erection of 1.5m (5ft) fence and gate onto walkway within front garden area (retrospective) Location: 6 Alton Way, West Kilbride, Ayrshire, KA23 9JJ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LDP Allocation: General Urban Area LDP Policies: SP1 - Towns and Villages Objective / Strategic Policy 2 / ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Consultations: None Undertaken Neighbour Notification: Neighbour Notification carried out on 19.04.2023 Neighbour Notification expired on 10.05.2023 Advert: Not Advertised ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Previous Applications: None Appeal History Of Site: Relevant Development Plan Policies SP1 - Towns and Villages Objective Towns and Villages Objective Our towns and villages are where most of our homes, jobs, community facilities, shops and services are located. We want to continue to support our communities, businesses and protect our natural environment by directing new development to our towns and villages as shown in the Spatial Strategy. Within urban areas (within the settlement boundary), the LDP identifies town centre locations, employment locations and areas of open space. Most of the remaining area within settlements is shown as General Urban Area. Within the General Urban Area, proposals for residential development will accord with the development plan in principle, and applications will be assessed against the policies of the LDP. New non-residential proposals will be assessed against policies of this LDP that relate to the proposal. In principle, we will support development proposals within our towns and villages that: a) Support the social and economic functions of our town centres by adopting a town centre first principle that directs major new development and investment to town centre locations as a priority including supporting town centre living.
Page 12
23/00254/PP b) Provide the right new homes in the right places by working alongside the Local Housing Strategy to deliver choice and variety in the housing stock, protecting land for housing development to ensure we address housing need and demand within North Ayrshire and by supporting innovative approaches to improving the volume and speed of housing delivery. c) Generate new employment opportunities by identifying a flexible range of business, commercial and industrial areas to meet market demands including those that would support key sector development at Hunterston and i3, Irvine. d) Recognise the value of our built and natural environment by embedding placemaking into our decision-making. e) Prioritise the re-use of brownfield land over greenfield land by supporting a range of strategic developments that will deliver: o regeneration of vacant and derelict land through its sustainable and productive re-use, particularly at Ardrossan North Shore, harbour and marina areas, Montgomerie Park (Irvine) and Lochshore (Kilbirnie). o regeneration and conservation benefits, including securing the productive re- use of Stoneyholm Mill (Kilbirnie) and supporting the Millport Conservation Area Regeneration Scheme. f) Support the delivery of regional partnerships such as the Ayrshire Growth Deal in unlocking the economic potential of the Ayrshire region. Strategic Policy 2 Placemaking Our Placemaking policy will ensure we are meeting LOIP priorities to make North Ayrshire safer and healthier by ensuring that all development contributes to making quality places. The policy also safeguards, and where possible enhances environmental quality through the avoidance of unacceptable adverse environmental or amenity impacts. We expect that all applications for planning permission meet the six qualities of successful places, contained in this policy. This is in addition to establishing the principle of development in accordance with Strategic Policy 1: Spatial Strategy. These detailed criteria are generally not repeated in the detailed policies section of the LDP. They will apply, as appropriate, to all developments. Six qualities of a successful place Distinctive The proposal draws upon the positive characteristics of the surrounding area including landscapes, topography, ecology, skylines, spaces and scales, street and building forms, and materials to create places with a sense of identity. Welcoming The proposal considers the future users of the site and helps people to find their way around, for example, by accentuating existing landmarks to create or improve views (including sea views), locating a distinctive work of art in a notable place or making the most of gateway features to and from the development. It should also ensure that appropriate signage and lighting is used to improve safety and illuminate attractive buildings. Safe and Pleasant The proposal creates attractive places by providing a sense of security, including by encouraging activity, considering crime rates, providing a clear distinction between private and public space, creating active frontages and considering the benefits of natural surveillance for streets, paths and open spaces.
Page 13
23/00254/PP The proposal creates a pleasant, positive sense of place by promoting visual quality, encouraging social and economic interaction and activity, and by considering the place before vehicle movement. The proposal respects the amenity of existing and future users in terms of noise, privacy, sunlight/daylight, smells, vibrations, glare, traffic generation, and parking. The proposal sufficiently investigates and responds to any issues of ground instability. Adaptable The proposal considers future users of the site and ensures that the design is adaptable to their needs. This includes consideration of future changes of use that may involve a mix of densities, tenures, and typologies to ensure that future diverse but compatible uses can be integrated including the provision of versatile multi- functional greenspace. Resource Efficient The proposal maximises the efficient use of resources. This can be achieved by re- using or sharing existing resources and by minimising their future depletion. This includes consideration of technological and natural means such as flood drainage systems, heat networks, solar gain, renewable energy and waste recycling as well as use of green and blue networks. Easy to Move Around and Beyond The proposal considers the connectedness of the site for people before the movement of motor vehicles, by prioritising sustainable and active travel choices, such as walking, cycling and public transport and ensuring layouts reflect likely desire lines, through routes and future expansions. Description 6 Alton Way is a two-storey semi-detached dwellinghouse located in West Kilbride. The house features a gabled roof finished in concrete tiles and rendered walls. It was erected in the latter half of the twentieth century. The houses on Alton Way were constructed in the Radburn style street layout with front elevations facing onto a footpath and vehicular access being provided via lanes to the rear of the houses. The surrounding area is residential and comprises of houses of a similar age and style. This is a retrospective application for the erection of a 1.5m high timber fence around the front garden of the application property. The fence was erected in late summer 2022 and was subsequently the subject of an enforcement investigation (22/00071/BREACH). The investigation found that planning permission was required for the fence. The owner of the property was advised on the need for permission in order to retain the fence, although, without prejudice, it was considered unlikely that an application would receive officer support. The alternative would have been to reduce the height of the fence to 1m, and it would therefore benefit from permitted development rights under Class 3E of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, as amended. Notwithstanding this advice, the owner has decided to apply for planning permission in retrospect.
Page 14
23/00254/PP A supporting statement has been provided. In summary, this states that the applicant discussed their proposal for a fence with North Ayrshire Council (NAC) Planning prior to buying the property and was advised that no permission would be required. Had it been known that permission was required and would not be granted, the applicant would not have purchased the house, as a secure garden is necessary for pet dogs. It contends that what NAC Planning considered to be the front garden could be considered to be the back garden, and therefore planning permission would not be required for the fence. Finally, the statement notes that other houses nearby have fences over 1m in height in the front garden areas. In the adopted North Ayrshire Local Development Plan (LDP) the site is located in a General Urban Area land allocation. The relevant policies of the LDP with relation to the proposed development are The Towns and Villages Objective of Strategic Policy 1: Spatial Strategy and Strategic Policy 2: Placemaking. All development proposals also require to be assessed against the adopted National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). Consultations and Representations The neighbour notification process was undertaken and there was no requirement to advertise the application. No letters of representation were received. No consultations were undertaken as part of this planning application. Analysis The erection of a fence within the curtilage of an existing dwellinghouse located in a General Urban Area allocation is acceptable in principle in terms of The Towns and Villages Objective of Strategic Policy 1: Spatial Strategy of the LDP. The application only therefore requires to be assessed in terms of Strategic Policy 2: Placemaking. Strategic Policy 2: Placemaking, states that all development proposals must meet the qualities of successful places as outlined in the policy. Generally, fences and walls in excess of 1m in height are not supported in the front gardens of residential properties, as they are considered to be too high and detract from the character and appearance of the area. Higher fences and walls should typically be restricted to the rear gardens of dwellinghouses. The Radburn style street layout of Alton Way means that the front gardens are the primary amenity space of the houses, and the rear gardens are smaller and often mostly occupied by garages and extensions. Notwithstanding, the front gardens of Alton Way have mostly retained their open character which creates a pleasant and attractive setting for the houses. The applicant's fence introduces an enclosure which detracts from the open character of the front gardens of Alton Way and therefore negatively impacts on the appearance of the area. While there is no 'precedent' in planning, and all applications are assessed on their own merits, if this application was approved, it would be difficult to refuse potential future applications for high fences and walls in the front gardens of Alton Way, and this could further erode the open character of the area. In terms of amenity, while the fence does not negatively affect the amenity of the neighbouring properties by way of overlooking or overshadowing, the negative
Page 15
23/00254/PP impact that it has on the appearance of the area is considered to be detrimental to the amenity of the neighbouring properties. In their Supporting Statement the applicant states that the fence is required in order to contain her dogs, and that a 1m high fence would not be sufficient for this purpose. Whilst this is taken into account, it is not considered to outweigh the negative effect that the fence has on the appearance of the area, and it is considered that there are likely other solutions to contain the dogs that would not have such a detrimental impact on the appearance of the area. In response to the applicant's supporting statement: - The applicant did not seek written pre-application planning advice prior to erecting the fence - Alton Way utilises the Radburn style layout where the elevations facing the footpath were intended to be the principle/front elevations of the houses. This is evidenced by the design of the houses and the design of the access lanes to the rear, which are clearly backland in their character. - There is a history of planning permissions for neighbouring properties which considered that the elevations facing onto the footpath are the front, or principal, elevations (ref. 04/01163/PP, 09/00211/PP and 15/00037/PP). - There are no instances of planning permission having been granted for other fences in excess of 1m in height on Alton Way: the case officer did not note any during their site visit. - It is possible that fences that should have required planning permission have been erected in the past. If they were not reported to the Council for investigation within 4 years of being erected, they would become lawful and immune from planning enforcement action. The fence is not considered to align with the qualities of successful places outlined in Strategic Policy 2: Placemaking, in particular it is not considered to be distinctive nor welcoming. The proposal is therefore contrary to Strategic Policy 2. The proposal also does not accord with Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place, of NPF4, which is similar in content to Strategic Policy 2 of the LDP. There are no other material considerations. As such, it is recommended that the application be refused. Decision Refused Case Officer - Mr John Mack
Page 16
23/00254/PP Appendix 1 - Drawings relating to decision Drawing Title Drawing Reference (if applicable) Drawing Version (if applicable) Annotated Photos Location Plan
Page 17
No embedded text on this page.
Page 18
Yvonne Baulk : Head Of Service (Housing & Public Protection) No N/23/00254/PP (Original Application No. N/100624029-001) REFUSAL OF PLANNING PERMISSION Type of Application: Local Application TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1997, AS AMENDED BY THE PLANNING ETC (SCOTLAND) ACT 2006. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) REGULATIONS 2013 To : Ms Jenny Heywood 6 Alton Way West Kilbride Ayrshire KA23 9JJ With reference to your application received on 18 April 2023 for planning permission under the above mentioned Acts and Orders for :- Erection of 1.5m (5ft) fence and gate onto walkway within front garden area (retrospective) at 6 Alton Way West Kilbride Ayrshire KA23 9JJ North Ayrshire Council in exercise of their powers under the above-mentioned Acts and Orders hereby refuse planning permission on the following grounds :- 1. The proposal is contrary to Strategic Policy 2: Placemaking, of the adopted North Ayrshire Local Development Plan and Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place, of the National Planning Framework 4. The fence does not accord with the qualities of successful places and detracts from the open character and appearance of the area. The fence is not considered to be distinctive in that it does not draw upon the positive characteristics of the surrounding area and is not in-keeping with the appearance of the area. Dated this : 19 May 2023 ......................................................... for the North Ayrshire Council (See accompanying notes)
Page 19
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 AS AMENDED BY THE PLANNING ETC (SCOTLAND) ACT 2006. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE) (SCOTLAND) REGULATIONS 2013 – REGULATION 28 Yvonne Baulk : Head Of Service (Housing & Public Protection) FORM 2 1. If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision to refuse permission for or approval required by a condition in respect of the proposed development, or to grant permission or approval subject to conditions, the applicant may require the planning authority to review the case under section 43A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 within three months from the date of this notice. The notice of review should be addressed to Committee Services, Chief Executive's Department, Cunninghame House, Irvine, North Ayrshire, KA12 8EE. 2. If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions and the owner of the land claims that the land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot be rendered capable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any development which has been or would be permitted, the owner of the land may serve on the planning authority a purchase notice requiring the purchase of the owner of the land's interest in the land in accordance with Part 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.