(a) Notice of Review and supporting documents (Pages 541-606)
Perth and Kinross Council · 8 July 2024
Back to Local Review Body — 8 July 2024 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(vi)(a) LRB-2024-25 LRB-2024-25 23/02142/FLL – Siting of 2 holiday accommodation units and associated works, Chapter House, Fossoway, Kinross, KY13 9UP PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
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
No embedded text on this page.
Page 6
No embedded text on this page.
Page 7
No embedded text on this page.
Page 8
Andrew Megginson Architecture PROPOSED SITING OF 2 HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION UNITS AND ASSOCIATED WORKS, CHAPTER HOUSE FOSSOWAY – 23/02142/FLL Local Review Body Statement 1.1 This Local Review Body (LRB) statement discusses why our proposals are in line with the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 2019 and NPF4 against the reasons for refusal below. This Local Review Body statement should however be read fully in line with all the submitted planning application documents and information along with the provision of a visit to the application site. Proposed site plan 1 The proposed development fails to meet the relevant criteria for countryside development to be justified, is not compatible with the private rural residential development, would have a significant detrimental impact on residential amenity, promotes unsustainable travel patterns by virtue of its remoteness from public transport options, and fails to meet a specific need by virtue of its quality or location in relation to existing businesses or tourist facilities. The proposed holiday accommodation is contrary to Policy 13: Sustainable Transport (part b), Policy 29: Rural Development (part b), and Policy 30: Tourism (part b) of National Planning Framework 4 (2023), and Policy 8: Rural Business and Diversification, Policy 9C: Caravan Sites, Chalets and Timeshare Developments: Chalets, Timeshare and Fractional Ownership, and Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development Proposals of the Perth & Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). 1.2 Firstly we would like to point out to the LRB, application 23/01562/FLL for part change of use of garage to short-term let accommodation, erection of ancillary building/ kitchen and installation of wood fired hot tub which was approved on 15/2/24 evaluated under the same local development plan and NPF4. This application site is immediately adjacent to the application site for this application 23/02142/FLL under review. The planning officer stated the following on that application “This is a small-scale unit for 1-2 persons comprising of a room with a bed and a separate bathroom. The unit has its own door and there are two window openings. A summerhouse is located to the rear providing a kitchen and living area and there is also
Page 9
Andrew Megginson Architecture a hot tub, all within the domestic garden ground of Chapter House. The summerhouse is positioned to look into the garden ground and there is screening around the hot tub. … given the small-scale nature of the unit it is considered the proposed use would not have an unacceptable impact on local amenity or the character of the surrounding area.” The planning officer then states “There are economic benefits to the provision of small-scale holiday let accommodation in this location which provide access to a range of tourist attractions and activities.”. Lastly the planning officer states “As the proposal would be compatible with the amenity and character of the surrounding area it also satisfies NPF4 Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place and LDP2 Policy 1: Placemaking. In respect of NPF4 Policy 13: Sustainable Transport and LDP2 Policy 60B: New Development Proposals, the short-term let is within an established rural residential development with limited access to public transport and there is already a reliance on private car. Due to the small-scale nature of the proposal, it is not considered to be a significant travel generating use which would increase reliance on the private car. The main mode of transport to the short-term let unit is likely to be private car and parking is available within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse. The proposal satisfies NPF4 Policy 13: Sustainable Transport and LDP2 Policy 60B: New Development Proposals.” It should be noted that the planning officer for application 23/01562/FLL is the same for this application 23/02142/FLL. 1.3 To the above it is clear the planning officer contradicts their views for a similar small scale short- term let immediately adjacent to the application site they granted planning permission for. 1.4 Mrs Pilkington predominantly operates the business herself (as a super host on Airbnb) where the existing established and successful short-term let property is her sole source of income. The success of the existing business has led to her ambition of extending this as per the proposals under this application. Mr and Mrs Pilkington have a large vacant area of garden ground adjacent to the existing short-term unit which is seen as the only potential location for such an expansion which is limited to two units placed sympathetically within the said area. As can be provided upon request the occupancy rate of the existing short-term let is high where occupants provide feedback along the lines of “in a lovely countryside location”, “Absolutely beautiful get-away” and “Amazing spot”. They also note local attractions they have visited whilst staying such as Knockhill, local towns and nearby walks. To this and that evidenced in the design statement and business plan/ justification statement we strongly refute that the proposal does not meet a specific need by virtue of its quality or location in relation to existing businesses or tourist facilities. The proposals clearly are in response to high demand for the current short-term let accommodation where the location and relation to existing business and tourist facilities are validated as a huge draw for visitors to this specific location. 1.5 As with a recent planning application (21/00947/FLL) that AMA acted as agent upon that was initially refused by the planning officer then overturned by the Local Review Body, unsustainable travel patterns was also a reason for refusal to that planning application. When we went to the Local Review Body with this application, councillors specifically noted that cars were already accessing the house at the application site so there would be no impact on the infrastructure, this is same with our site with cars already accessing the residential development and existing short-term let as acknowledged by the planning officer in application 23/01562/FLL. The councillors did not feel the unsustainable transport reason for refusal was an issue due to the nature of these types of developments being accessed by a car to glamp and the existing sustainable transport of walking and cycling in the area outweighed this, this was further concreted with another councillor specifically commenting that if this reason for refusal was accepted then nothing would ever be built within Perth and Kinross. We feel this reason for refusal should be dismissed in line with the above, further to this and as per our business plan/ justification statement, the application site is just off the Heart 200 route a driving/ touring route that the proposed development would be beneficial to. This position/ conclusion on the unsustainable transport is contrary to it being accepted by the planning officer that the private car would be the main source of transport for the existing short-term let that was granted permission. There shall be two dedicated parking areas within the site/ off the road. 2 The proposed development is poorly designed and incompatible with the amenity and character of the surrounding residential development and is therefore contrary to Policy 14: Design, Quality and Place of National Planning Framework 4 (2023) and Policy 1: Placemaking of the Perth & Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019). 1.6 The following section discusses reason for refusal 2 and also the notes stating that the proposal “is not compatible with the private rural residential development, would have a significant detrimental impact on residential amenity” within reason for refusal 1. 1.7 As is evident there has been permission granted for another short-term let unit within the curtilage of Chapter House thus the principle of small scale short-term let accommodation has been seen as acceptable on the site. The planning officer has previously stated that the small scale nature of that unit
Page 10
Andrew Megginson Architecture would not have an unacceptable impact on local amenity or the character of the surrounding area, so we question why their view is contradictory in this application. The footprint of the two proposed units combined is less than that of the building the existing short-term unit is located within and the proposed units are also lower in height than that which has been granted permission. The two proposed units utilise structures that are residential in scale where they take on the form of outbuildings within a garden area to a house where there is actually existing similar structures to The Cart Shed and Thornybrook within the residential development to the SW of the application site (see appendix A). The two proposed units are orientated towards the views of the hills and located far enough away from existing dwellings so there shall be no privacy issues affecting surrounding amenity, this is further reinforced with the screening provided by the existing landscape containment surrounding the proposals at all sides, furthermore the units are for 1-2 persons, same as that which has been granted permission, so with the small scale nature and the position of the units being located away from existing dwellings shall not have a detrimental effect on local amenity. It should also be noted that all short-term lets in Scotland now have a licencing authority who shall police these developments where any complaints shall be investigated and any significant/ continual issues would result in the short-term let having to cease operation. This along with the full time management by Mrs Pilkington coupled with Mr Pilkington being a Sergeant with Police Scotland and his awareness of the aforementioned legislation and requirements to this shall further protect neighbouring amenity. To date there have been no complaints from neighbours or guests regarding noise, privacy or anti-social behaviour in relation to the existing short-term unit.. Being respectful to neighbours and the surrounding area is also highlighted to guests within their welcome information for existing unit and same shall be done for the proposed units. The domestic scale of the proposals along with their orientation and positioning within the existing landscape containment/ screening within the site results in a development that is compatible with the character of the surrounding area and shall not detrimentally affect any neighbouring amenity. 1.8 NPF4 Policy 30 – Tourism outlines the following criteria relevant to this application: (b) Proposals for tourism related development will take into account: (i) the contribution made to the local economy; - The proposals shall benefit the local economy with visitors spending money on local businesses and tourist attractions. (ii) compatibility with the surrounding area in terms of the nature and scale of the activity and impacts of increased visitors; - As existing there is already a short-term let business adjacent to the application site. The scale of the proposals is small and takes on the look of a residential outbuilding within garden ground of the house, similarly to an existing structure that exists within the residential development. The increased number of visitors shall be small and have no detrimental impact on the surrounding area. (iii) impacts on communities, for example by hindering the provision of homes and services for local people; - The proposal is for a small scale short-term business expansion which shall not have any detrimental impact on the amenity or services of the existing community. (iv) opportunities for sustainable travel and appropriate management of parking and traffic generation and scope for sustaining public transport services particularly in rural areas; - As is acknowledged and clearly see around the UK these types of developments are largely accessed by the private car however when at the site there is access to local sustainable walking and cycling routes. As existing the residential development is only accessed by car. (v) accessibility for disabled people; - The proposal has a ramp from the parking area to the units which are themselves accessible. (vi) measures taken to minimise carbon emissions; - The units shall be prefabricated off site saving materials and energy. Due to the small scale of the proposal there is limited renewable technology available to the structures. (vii) opportunities to provide access to the natural environment. The proposals shall allow visitors access to the natural environment. 1.9 In relation to some other points raised but not forming reasons for refusal. The proposal shall connect to the existing water supply of the house where there shall be adequate provision to service the existing house, short-terms units (existing and proposed) and the rest of the existing development (Scottish Water have confirmed this to the applicant). Drainage shall be through a treatment plan which shall be discharged within the site so shall present no flooding issues elsewhere. The proposals shall have no impact on any existing trees or biodiversity with the proposal being within the garden area of Chapter House and having no
Page 11
Andrew Megginson Architecture foundations. The treatment plant is shown indicative and shall be located out with root protection areas of all trees. The proposals are also to part of Chapter House’s curtilage that is generally unused where it is intended that no further units would be proposed and the rear garden area to the SW of the house shall be retained as private garden ground to the house which is a requirement of its planning permission. 1.10 We respectfully request the Local Review Body overturn the planning officer decision and grant planning permission subject to the above and submitted planning application documents and information.
Page 12
Andrew Megginson Architecture Appendix A Photo showing a similar structure to that as proposed to the right hand side in the curtilage of Thornybrook within the residential development Photo showing a similar structure to that as proposed in the curtilage of Glendevon within the residential development
Page 13
Andrew Megginson Architecture Photo of a BBQ hut in a similar style to that of the proposals in the curtilage of The Cart Shed within the residential development
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.
Page 21
No embedded text on this page.
Page 22
No embedded text on this page.
Page 23
No embedded text on this page.
Page 24
No embedded text on this page.
Page 25
No embedded text on this page.
Page 26
No embedded text on this page.
Page 27
No embedded text on this page.
Page 28
No embedded text on this page.
Page 29
No embedded text on this page.
Page 30
No embedded text on this page.
Page 31
No embedded text on this page.
Page 32
No embedded text on this page.
Page 33
No embedded text on this page.
Page 34
No embedded text on this page.
Page 35
No embedded text on this page.
Page 36
No embedded text on this page.
Page 37
No embedded text on this page.
Page 38
No embedded text on this page.
Page 39
No embedded text on this page.
Page 40
No embedded text on this page.
Page 41
No embedded text on this page.
Page 42
No embedded text on this page.
Page 43
No embedded text on this page.
Page 44
No embedded text on this page.
Page 45
No embedded text on this page.
Page 46
No embedded text on this page.
Page 47
No embedded text on this page.
Page 48
No embedded text on this page.
Page 49
No embedded text on this page.
Page 50
No embedded text on this page.
Page 51
No embedded text on this page.
Page 52
No embedded text on this page.
Page 53
No embedded text on this page.
Page 54
No embedded text on this page.
Page 55
No embedded text on this page.
Page 56
No embedded text on this page.
Page 57
No embedded text on this page.
Page 58
No embedded text on this page.
Page 59
No embedded text on this page.
Page 60
No embedded text on this page.
Page 61
No embedded text on this page.
Page 62
No embedded text on this page.
Page 63
No embedded text on this page.
Page 64
No embedded text on this page.
Page 65
No embedded text on this page.
Page 66
No embedded text on this page.