planning submission redacted
Renfrewshire Council · 30 May 2023
Back to Local Review Body. — 30 May 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
PLANNING AUTHORITY’S SUBMISSIONS
Page 2
No embedded text on this page.
Page 3
No embedded text on this page.
Page 4
Page 2 of 3 Ref. 22/0399/PP REASON FOR REFUSAL PAPER APART TERMS AND CONDITIONS Reason for Decision 1. The proposed development does not comply with Policy ENV1 of the Adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan 2021 and the New Development Supplementary Guidance on Housing in the Green Belt as it has not been demonstrated that there is a specific locational need for a dwellinghouse. 2. The proposed development does not comply with Policy ENV1 of the Adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan 2021 and the New Development Supplementary Guidance on Green Belt Development as it has not been demonstrated that the site can be accessed safely, and that traffic and access infrastructure can be accommodated sensitively.
Page 5
Page 3 of 3 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 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 Act (Scotland) Act 1997 within three months beginning with the date of this notice. The notice of review should be addressed to Head of Legal and Democratic Services, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley PA1 1PR. 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.
Page 6
Appendix 1 RENFREWSHIRE COUNCIL Application No: 22/0399/PP CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S SERVICE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING APPLICATION Regd:7 June 2022 Applicant Agent Ms Marna Murdoch North Paddock Properties Ltd. 1-2 23 Redlands Lane Kelvinside Glasgow G12 0AF Nicholas John Hobson Hobson Architects Seacliff Eglinton Terrace Skelmorlie PA17 5EP Nature of Proposals Erection of dwellinghouse (in principle) Site Site 50 Metres East of St Brydes Cottage, Shields Holdings, Lochwinnoch Description This application seeks planning permission in principle for the erection of a dwellinghouse on land to the east of St Brydes Cottage. St Brydes Cottage forms part of a cluster of dwellinghouses which is located at the junction of Station Road and a private track approx. 1.4km to the north west of Howwood. The application site is irregularly shaped, and extends to approx 4,000 square metres. It comprises of gently undulating grassland, with mature trees along the eastern and southern boundaries. The eastern and southern edges of the site are defined by a burn, with the curtilage of St.Brydes Cottage to the west and the junction of Station Road and the private track to the north. Site access is via a field gate on the northern boundary. History No previous applications. Policy and Material Considerations Adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan 2021 Policy ENV1 – Green Belt New Development Supplementary Guidance 2022 Delivering the Environment Strategy – Green Belt Development Criteria, Housing in the Green Belt Material Considerations Publicity The Council has undertaken neighbour notification in accordance with the requirements of
Page 7
legislation. An Advert was placed on the press on 8 July 2022 for the following reason: Neighbour Notification. Objections/Representation Twelve letters of representation have been received, nine in support of the development and three in objection. The points raised in support of the development can be summarised as follows: 1 – Will utilise a small impractical green belt space within an existing cluster of properties. 2 – The development could provide a sustainable place to work from home. 3 – Good quality materials and landscaping will ensure the dwelling sits harmoniously within its surroundings. 4 – There is no loss of prime quality agricultural land. 5 – The proposal is in line with the National Planning Framework. 6 – There would be no loss of openness or public amenity. 7 – The proposal will have no effect on climate change or adverse environmental impact. 8 – Empty sites can often be targets for fly tipping. 9 – The application accords with the new guidelines for planning in the countryside The points raised against the development can be summarised as follows: 1 – Potential impact on existing soak away and septic tank within the site. 2 – Access is unsuitable and dangerous. 3 – Surface water runoff and drainage. 4 – The site is not readily accessible by walking or cycling and no infrastructure to support travel by these modes. 5 – Loss of privacy. 6 – Ground conditions and stability. Consultations Chief Executive’s Service (Roads Development) – No objection subject to conditions regarding sightlines and surfacing.
Page 8
Communities & Housing Services (Environmental Protection Team) – No comments. Informative to be added: N Summary of Main Issues of: Planning Statement – Presents an overview of the site and the proposed concept and provides a contextual analysis against the relevant planning policy and guidance. States that the development will not undermine the core role and function of the green belt or the robustness or effectiveness of the policy. The proposals present no threat of coalescence between settlements, and instead recognises the presence of clusters within the locality. The proposal carefully considers design and scale and will deliver appropriate landscaping. In terms of further justification, the outcome of draft consultation on National Planning Framework 4 is noted with respect to increasing the population of the rural areas of Scotland. It is asserted that the transition to remote working can be one of the drivers of this change, and there is already emerging evidence that the shift to remote working is prompting people to look to move. This represents an opportunity to support a rebalancing of the population. Concludes that the proposals in their present form are entirely compatible with the core values of greenbelt policy and the requirements of sustainability. Assessment Policy ENV1 states that residential development within the green belt will be considered appropriate in principle where it is a housing land shortfall remedy which satisfies Policy 8 of Clydeplan or is in support of certain uses. It also states that development within the green belt will only be considered acceptable where it can be demonstrated that it is compatible with the provisions of the New Development Supplementary Guidance. A housing land shortfall has not been identified. Therefore, the proposal requires to be assessed against the other criteria that allow development of this type to come forward and the criteria within the draft New Development Supplementary Guidance (SG). The SG states that development can be acceptable in principle where it is for a purpose in support of acceptable green belt uses. Green Belt Development Criteria provides a set of guidance that all development require to meet, including that traffic and access infrastructure can be sensitively accommodated and that it has been demonstrated that there has been careful consideration of the siting, design, scale and grouping of any buildings and infrastructure. Further to this guidance Housing in the Green Belt states residential development proposals require to be assessed against the following criteria. Development is required to maintain and support an established activity The development is not required to maintain or support an established activity that is suitable in the green belt. There is a need for the residential use to be located outwith the settlement It has not been demonstrated that there is a need for the development to be located outwith the
Page 9
settlement. The supporting statement suggests that support for the development could derive from National Planning Framework (NPF) 4 which seeks to increase the population of rural areas of Scotland. The transition to remote working is one factor that can facilitate this population increase. Notwithstanding the fact that the NPF is still in draft form, and I do not consider that significant weight can be attached to these statements as material considerations in this assessment. I also do not consider that the occupants potentially working from home would provide a locational justification either. The employment status of future occupants cannot be controlled by the Planning Authority, and additionally the site location is still primarily car dependent with respect to accessing other amenities. Buildings which have special architectural, traditional or historic character may be converted for residential use The development does not involve the conversion of an existing building. The proposal demonstrates outstanding quality of design, is of an appropriate scale within its setting, and makes a positive contribution to the site and surrounding area As the application is in principle only no detailed design details have been provided. However the applicant has provided indicative designs which show a dwellinghouse could be accommodated on the plot with respect to its dimensions. The proposal integrates with, complements and enhances the established character of the area As the application is in principle only no detailed design details have been provided. However, the applicant has provided indicative designs which show how a dwellinghouse could be accommodated on the plot with respect to its impact on landscape character. Replacement dwellings should reflect the specific character of the location, fit well with the surrounding landscape and achieve a high design standard The proposed development does not constitute a replacement dwellinghouse. On balance it is accepted that the proposed site could accommodate a dwellinghouse in a manner that complements the existing cluster and the wider environment. However, there is no locational justification for the development in terms of supporting an established activity or through some other locational need. The applicants state that the development does not undermine the core role and function of the green belt. However, the core role and function of the green belt can only be upheld through supporting sustainable growth as outlined in the new development supplementary guidance. The development does not comply with the guidance on the sustainable delivery of housing in the green belt in this regard. In addition to the above the development must also be assessed against the green belt development criteria. There is no loss of prime quality agricultural land associated with the proposals. It is also not
Page 10
No embedded text on this page.
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
4 : In the previous application by Ms Murdoch ,it was stated that the site does not appear to be in close proximity to amenities, which could be readily accessed by walking or cycling , which is absolutely correct. In current application is says, not true as 1 mile to park and ride. This may be but there is no footpath either side of road to both Howwood or Lochwinnoch. Cycling this road is particularly dangerous in general and people here, use the gravel lane to access the cycle path. In light of all the concerns ,it would be prudent for a site visit and hope you will agree that the access to this proposed development is too dangerous. Photographs attached.
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
The proposal is a viable use of disused green belt land & is no loss of quality agricultural land, in line with the National Planning Framework. With considered construction, the proposal has no effect on climate change or adverse environmental impact, & has the potential to generate energy. I therefore fully support this application. Yours sincerely, Calum McPherson Dolphin Wave Bridesmill Rd Markethill Lochwinnoch PA12 4HP
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.