(b) Planning Decision Notice, Report of Handling and Reference Documents (Pages 73-92)
Perth and Kinross Council · 22 September 2025
Back to Local Review Body — 22 September 2025 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
4(ii)(b) LRB-2025-13 LRB-2025-13 25/00317/FLL - Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse, 1 Orchard Brae, Aberfeldy, PH15 2BF Planning Decision Notice Report of Handling Reference Documents
Page 2
No embedded text on this page.
Page 3
No embedded text on this page.
Page 4
No embedded text on this page.
Page 5
Report Of Handling Delegated Report Ref No 25/00317/FLL Ward No P4- Highland Due Determination Date 6th May 2025 Draft Report Date 8th April 2025 Report Issued by Andrew Rennie Date 11.4.25 Proposal: Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse Location: 1 Orchard Brae Aberfeldy PH15 2BF Summary: This report recommends refusal of the application as the development is considered to be contrary to the relevant provisions of the Development Plan and there are no material considerations apparent which justify setting aside the Development Plan. Background and Description of Proposal 1 Orchard Brae is a detached dwellinghouse located within a residential area of Aberfeldy. The two-storey property is located on a prominent and elevated corner plot location, and serves as a focal property that fronts onto both Orchard Brae and Kenmore Road, the latter being a popular tourist route. There are no other specific or sensitive designations within the area. This application seeks detailed planning permission for the erection of a wrapround extension to the property’s principal (north-west) elevation and side (north-east) elevation. Site History 00/00737/FUL Erection of 7 houses at 13 July 2000 Application Approved 20/01648/FLL Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse 17 December 2020 Application Approved Pre-Application Consultation Pre application Reference: none. Development Plan The Development Plan for the area comprises National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019) (LDP2).
Page 6
National Planning Framework 4 The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is the Scottish Government’s long-term spatial strategy with a comprehensive set of national planning policies. This strategy sets out how to improve people’s lives by making sustainable, liveable and productive spaces. NPF4 was adopted on 13 February 2023. NPF4 has an increased status over previous NPFs and comprises part of the statutory development plan. The Council’s assessment of this application has considered the following policies of NPF4: Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place Policy 16: Quality Homes Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 – Adopted November 2019 The Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2) is the most recent statement of Council policy and is augmented by Supplementary Guidance. The principal policies are: Policy 1A: Placemaking Policy 1B: Placemaking Policy 17: Residential Areas Statutory Supplementary Guidance Supplementary Guidance - Placemaking (adopted in 2020) Other Policies Non-Statutory Guidance None. National Guidance The Scottish Government expresses its planning policies through The National Planning Framework, Planning Advice Notes, Creating Places, Designing Streets, National Roads Development Guide and a series of Circulars.
Page 7
Planning Advice Notes The following Scottish Government Planning Advice Notes (PANs) and Guidance Documents are of relevance to the proposal: PAN 40 Development Management Creating Places 2013 Creating Places is the Scottish Government’s policy statement on architecture and place. It sets out the comprehensive value good design can deliver. It notes that successful places can unlock opportunities, build vibrant communities and contribute to a flourishing economy and set out actions that can achieve positive changes in our places. Consultation Responses External Scottish Water No objection and advice provided, if minded to approve. Service cannot be guaranteed, the applicant is advised to limit existing discharge rate and volume, consider alternative rainwater options and no new connections to public infrastructure permitted. Additional surface water shall discharge to existing private pipework within the site boundary. There is live infrastructure in proximity to the development area that may impact on Scottish Water assets (90mm MDPE main and 150mm surface water main) and the applicant is advised to identify any potential conflicts by contacting the Asset Impact Team via their customer portal (ref. DSCAS-0128909-Y6S). Representations Number of representations received: 0 Additional Statements Received: Screening Opinion Not Required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not applicable Appropriate Assessment under Habitats Regulations AA Not Required Design Statement or Design and Access Statement Not Required Report on Impact or Potential Impact eg Flood Risk Assessment Not Required
Page 8
Appraisal Sections 25 and 37 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 require that planning decisions be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises NPF4 and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019. The relevant policy considerations are outlined in the policy section above and are considered in more detail below. In terms of other material considerations, involving considerations of the Council’s other approved policies and supplementary guidance, these are discussed below only where relevant. The determining issues in this case are whether; the proposal complies with development plan policy; or if there are any other material considerations which justify a departure from policy. Policy Appraisal Alterations and extensions to an existing dwellinghouse are generally considered to be acceptable in principle. Nevertheless, consideration must be given to the scale, form, massing, design, position, proportions and external finishes of the proposed development, within the context of the application site, and whether it would have an adverse impact upon visual, residential or environmental amenity. Design, Layout and Amenity The application seeks to erect a single-storey wraparound extension to the property’s principal (north-west) and side (north-east) elevation. There are three elements to this wraparound extension proposal: the front covered entrance, the side canopy cover and the corner extension. The extension would see the existing garage reconfigured and extended to form a gym and study space with covered canopy to the front and side. As per Placemaking Supplementary Guidance, extensions should respect the shape, scale and proportions of the existing building and relate to the roof pitch and original building depth. In most cases an extension should be a subordinate addition in all respects. Side extensions should provide an adequate and distinct separation between properties, be set back from the frontage of the building to establish subordination to the existing building, present a lowered roof ridge level to establish a separate identity to the extension; and ensure that windows on extensions provide adequate light whilst ensuring privacy to neighbouring properties. Front extensions should generally be avoided, in particular where they dominate the principal elevation of the property and where visual impact on an established streetscape is evident. However, modest porches or canopies may be an acceptable addition, providing that the rhythm of a repeating streetscene is not impaired and a well-designed proposal is presented. Relating to design, form and layout, the overall development would be set lower than the host property’s roof ridge line and would result in the creation of a new eaves line. Neither characteristic presents a concern. However, the corner extension and covered entrance would be forward of the established principal building line, which goes against
Page 9
Placemaking Guidance principles. The development would result in the introduction of new roof pitches with valley formation, and is considered a cumulatively and visually dominant addition to the principal (north-west) elevation. There are no concerns with the ‘light-touch’ side (north-east) elevation canopy but this element also extends beyond the principal building line, and is therefore deemed as inappropriate. The proposed development is relative in scale to the host property but does not respect host depth and proportions and therefore is not considered to be subordinate in all respects, particularly as the development is not set back from the frontage of the building and is not respectfully subservient to the principal elevation. Introduction of the development would result in a visually obvious and dominant change to the established streetscene, especially when viewed from Orchard Brae or from along Kenmore Road. There are no concerns with the proposed material finishes. Early engagement with the agent was achieved and all concerns were relayed. A request was made to seek amendment to the proposed development’s layout by setting it back from the principal building line and to alter the roof form whilst providing flexibility that a modest porch could be considered. The agent and applicant however had decided to continue with the current submission, without revision. It had been mentioned that the current proposal is of reduced massing when compared to previous permission ref. 20/01648/FLL on the same application site. This proposal approved under ref. 20/01648/FLL however related to an acceptable and appropriate two-storey extension which, in addition to other acceptable design detail, was set back from the property’s principal elevation. There is no justification to deviate away from established design and placemaking principles, in determining the current proposal. With respect to residential amenity, there are no concerns with direct overlooking or privacy impacts to neighbouring dwellinghouses to the east, south and south-east. Equally, by virtue of the development’s scale, there would be no overshadowing concerns. There are no drainage implications associated with this proposed development. However, please note the comments made by Scottish Water within the ‘consultation response’ section. Ultimately, the application site is both an elevated and focal corner plot dwellinghouse with prominent visible character when travelling in and out from Orchard Brae, along Kenmore Road and when exiting The Laurels (private road to the east). The proposed development would result in a visually prominent addition and disrespectful to host building lines. The property’s own degree of prominence, on a brae, justifies the requirement to seek sensitive and appropriately designed development that complies with relevant policies and guidance, whilst also respecting wider amenity, residential context and in enhancing the area as a welcoming place, as highlighted by Creating Places (2013). The proposal fails to comply with NPF4 Policy 14 and 16 (g)(i); LDP2 Policy 1A, 1B and 17; and as informed by Placemaking Supplementary Guidance.
Page 10
Conclusion and Reasons for Decision To conclude, the application must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this respect, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the Development Plan. Account has been taken of the relevant material considerations and none has been found that would justify overriding the Development Plan. Accordingly, the proposal is refused on the grounds identified below. Conditions and Reasons 1. Approval would be contrary to National Planning Framework 4 Policy 14 (a) where the proposed extension would not be designed to improve the quality of the area, in this case the dwellinghouse and its corner plot setting; (b) where the extension would result in an insensitive layout, roof pitch arrangement and building line projection impacting on the property’s principal elevation legibility, design influence, street frontage and sense of place, inconsistent with the ‘distinctive’ quality of a successful place; and (c) where the proposal is poorly designed and inconsistent with the six qualities of successful places; and Policy 16 (g)(i) where the extension would have a detrimental impact on the principal elevation character of the home in terms of design, positioning and layout projection to the north-west. 2. Approval would be contrary to the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 Policy 1A where the extension would not contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding built environment, in this case to the dwellinghouse and its corner plot setting, by virtue of its siting and design; Policy 1B (c) where the extension’s design would not complement its surroundings by virtue of multiple incongruous roof pitch arrangements and its disrespectful projection to the north-west, and (d) where it would not respect the existing principal building line, would not reinforce principal elevation legibility or character and would not reinforce the property’s street frontage as a corner plot unit; Policy 17 (c) where the extension would not result in an improvement to the area’s character; and as informed by Placemaking Supplementary Guidance. Justification The proposal is not in accordance with the Development Plan and there are no material reasons which justify departing from the Development Plan. Procedural Notes Not Applicable. Plans and Documents Relating to this Decision 01 02 03
Page 11
No embedded text on this page.
Page 12
No embedded text on this page.
Page 13
No embedded text on this page.
Page 14
No embedded text on this page.
Page 15
No embedded text on this page.
Page 16
No embedded text on this page.
Page 17
No embedded text on this page.
Page 18
No embedded text on this page.
Page 19
No embedded text on this page.
Page 20
No embedded text on this page.